Too fat to recruit: or, DePauw, the Sequel

[ΑΓΔSquirrelGirl]

Originally Posted by AlphaGamUGAAlum

They're certainly making that message a critical part of their campaign more than, what was it 33Girl said, the Latvian waifs?

And I think a lot of people are more favorably disposed to their products because of it.

In the context of this thread, what was the point again?

Here you are, it's the eleventh post down:

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...=88145&page=23

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by ΑΓΔSquirrelGirl

Here you are, it's the eleventh post down:

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...=88145&page=23

Help me out here; I still don't see the link to recruitment or how my feeling about Dove's ad figures in. I know I didn't bring it up.

ETA: was I supposed to look at KDs involvement with the Real Beauty campaign as having implications for improving situations in recruitment where people rely on image to make judgments?

[ΑΓΔSquirrelGirl]

Originally Posted by AlphaGamUGAAlum

Help me out here; I still don't see the link to recruitment or how my feeling about Dove's ad figures in. I know I didn't bring it up.

Ok do you see where KD begins talking about it? It started there. Read it. Then go to the next one. Read it. Then repeat until you get it.

[Tom Earp]

Would this include Nerds?

[ΑΓΔSquirrelGirl]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

Would this include Nerds?

Probably.

I like "nerds". They can actually hold an intelligent conversation...and most of them are nice enough to adjust the level of conversation for the person they're talking to

[kathykd2005]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

Would this include Nerds?

Tom, I'm not sure how this factors into the equation, but yes, NERDS ROCK. Plus, if you want to be superficial, they keep the chapter's GPA up, which makes them look "good." buahaha

[Tom Earp]

Originally Posted by kathykd2005

Tom, I'm not sure how this factors into the equation, but yes, NERDS ROCK. Plus, if you want to be superficial, they keep the chapter's GPA up, which makes them look "good." buahaha

So, "some others" do not?

Well Jugdish?

I now name this Barbieism thread!

[kathykd2005]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

So, "some others" do not?

Well Jugdish?

I now name this Barbieism thread!

O, Tom. I am not sure what you are saying here, but I am telling ya right here that I was kidding around. And, yes, "some others" don't make the organization look good, because they have skewed the meaning of the creed and history to their own liking, primarily to get better looking pledges.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by ΑΓΔSquirrelGirl

Ok do you see where KD begins talking about it? It started there. Read it. Then go to the next one. Read it. Then repeat until you get it.

Tried it. No luck. It seems strictly a rambling aside to me.

From it, I apparently can draw the following conclusions:

Most people don't look like fashion models.
Fashion models may or may not be beautiful depending on your feelings about Latvian orphans.
People who don't look like fashion models can be beautiful.
People who don't look like fashion models but are still beautiful are progressive when they sell us cellulite cream.

Am I also supposed to conclude that now image doesn't matter in recruitment?

KathyKD, will you tell me more explicitly what I didn't get?
(I know it's my fault for leading us off course, but now I can't see my way back.)

[kathykd2005]

Originally Posted by AlphaGamUGAAlum

Tried it. No luck. It seems strictly a rambling aside to me.

From it, I apparently can draw the following conclusions:

Most people don't look like fashion models.
Fashion models may or may not be beautiful depending on your feelings about Latvian orphans.
People who don't look like fashion models can be beautiful.
People who don't look like fashion models but are still beautiful are progressive when they sell us cellulite cream.

Am I also supposed to conclude that now image doesn't matter in recruitment?

KathyKD, will you tell me more explicitly what I didn't get?
(I know it's my fault for leading us off course, but now I can't see my way back.)

AlphaGam, I have explained on numerous occasions what I was talking about and how it related to this thread. I am sorry if you don't understand. I don't see another way of explaining it to you. We just don't agree--let's leave it at that.

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by kathykd2005

AlphaGam, I have explained on numerous occasions what I was talking about and how it related to this thread. I am sorry if you don't understand. I don't see another way of explaining it to you. We just don't agree--let's leave it at that.

You have your own sort of logic that has nothing to do with the fact that 2+2=4 and the earth goes around the sun, don't you?

[kathykd2005]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

You have your own sort of logic that has nothing to do with the fact that 2+2=4 and the earth goes around the sun, don't you?

No, not really--my logic is not that far off, since several people have been able to understand it. And there is no need to personally attack my logic, thanks.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by kathykd2005

AlphaGam, I have explained on numerous occasions what I was talking about and how it related to this thread. I am sorry if you don't understand. I don't see another way of explaining it to you. We just don't agree--let's leave it at that.

The weird part is I think I agree with you about standards of beauty and that things don't have to be cookie-cutter to be beautiful. I don't even think cookie-cutter is desirable in recruitment.

But that doesn't really help an individual or a group who is classified rightly or wrongly as "not-beautiful" at an image based recruitment.

ETA: unless you can take me back through it, seriously. I'm not making fun.

[Ilaria Ame]

oh my gosh die thread DIE