Default Theme

[Henrik Nilsen Omma]

Brett Kirksey wrote:

>Whether you or I like it or not, there are entire cultures that
>believe women should remain covered almost entirely (ever been
>to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc.?). That is probably where you will
>find a big problem.
>  
>
OK, but where do we draw the line? The whole concept of the distribution 
deals with humans and humanity, so it is natural to depict people. The 
fact that they have chosen to depict them in a fairly natural state is 
causing some controversy. What about an image of the blond lady from the 
waist up, fully dressed in a normal T-shirt. She has long, free-flowing 
hair, which might still be objectionable to the people you site in Egypt 
and Saudi Arabia. However, I feel quite strongly that women should not 
(in my view) be forced to wear head scarves, etc. So whose sensibilities 
do we take into consideration?

I'm not trying to be rhetorical here, just trying to explore the issue 
to see, where the problem lies, and how it might be solved. Slightly 
more clothing, is the obvious one, but when you put on clothes, you also 
put up your defenses against other people, which does not match the 
spirit of human openness and sharing that we want to convey. Perhaps 
some age variety in the models might help? An old person and a baby, 
say? That might remove some of the (possible) sexual undertones that 
some are worried about, but still keep the warm message.

>
>In business culture, where shirt and tie are required, default
>images of shirtless people may not go over very well. To them,
>it would take away from the "professionalism" of the system.
>  
>
I do NOT think we should have pictures of people in shirts and ties. 
Just because the business world is one of the markets Ubuntu is aiming 
for does not mean the people depicted need to look business like. The 
suit carries a message of competitiveness and a hard edge, that we want 
to avoid.

- Henrik