<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: That Guy Returns</title>
	<atom:link href="http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/</link>
	<description>Manolo Loves the Shoes!</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 16:29:03 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Lilly Munster</title>
		<link>http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567695</link>
		<dc:creator>Lilly Munster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:12:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567695</guid>
		<description>I agree with Poochie on line #3, the necklace is tacky.  I prefer to have one large diamond instead of many small ones.  Ha!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Poochie on line #3, the necklace is tacky.  I prefer to have one large diamond instead of many small ones.  Ha!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: elayne</title>
		<link>http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567690</link>
		<dc:creator>elayne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2008 14:36:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567690</guid>
		<description>I thought the dogwashing guy was sweet until the very end.  The expression on his face while he watches her fuss over the dog would make me run screaming if I looked up and saw it.  Seriously: It's sinister.  He's assessing how well he's played on her emotions her,  like he's setting a trap and waiting for just the right moment to spring it. 

The card-writing guy hit me like nails on a chalkboard from the moment he opened his mouth.  A REAL That Guy wouldn't make an announcement about the "depth of his feelings" or point out that he made the card by hand, like a first-grader waiting for a gold star.  That card wasn't about "the depth of his feelings for her," it was about HER gushing and praising HIM for his thoughtfulness and sensitivity. 

Both of these "That Guy"s come across as manipulative, demanding, and (BION) potential abusers or at least extremely toxic partners - the first one because his actions are calculated for the reaction that they'll cause, and the second one because he requires so much validation. 

I'd take a REAL That Guy over a diamond (or other gemstone - never did like diamonds) any day, but these guys are NOT "That Guy"s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought the dogwashing guy was sweet until the very end.  The expression on his face while he watches her fuss over the dog would make me run screaming if I looked up and saw it.  Seriously: It&#8217;s sinister.  He&#8217;s assessing how well he&#8217;s played on her emotions her,  like he&#8217;s setting a trap and waiting for just the right moment to spring it. </p>
<p>The card-writing guy hit me like nails on a chalkboard from the moment he opened his mouth.  A REAL That Guy wouldn&#8217;t make an announcement about the &#8220;depth of his feelings&#8221; or point out that he made the card by hand, like a first-grader waiting for a gold star.  That card wasn&#8217;t about &#8220;the depth of his feelings for her,&#8221; it was about HER gushing and praising HIM for his thoughtfulness and sensitivity. </p>
<p>Both of these &#8220;That Guy&#8221;s come across as manipulative, demanding, and (BION) potential abusers or at least extremely toxic partners - the first one because his actions are calculated for the reaction that they&#8217;ll cause, and the second one because he requires so much validation. </p>
<p>I&#8217;d take a REAL That Guy over a diamond (or other gemstone - never did like diamonds) any day, but these guys are NOT &#8220;That Guy&#8221;s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Renee</title>
		<link>http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567689</link>
		<dc:creator>Renee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2008 02:34:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567689</guid>
		<description>These are the death throes of the diamond cartel... A lot of women are opting for non-diamond/non-conventional engagement rings, there is a lot of bad PR of the blood-diamond type, and surveys show that most women would rather get gifts of electronics than jewelry. I imagine shoes and handbags also rank above diamonds for a lot of fashionable ladies. 

The commercials shoving gender stereotypes down our throats are gross, but they're resorting to these because they're desperate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These are the death throes of the diamond cartel&#8230; A lot of women are opting for non-diamond/non-conventional engagement rings, there is a lot of bad PR of the blood-diamond type, and surveys show that most women would rather get gifts of electronics than jewelry. I imagine shoes and handbags also rank above diamonds for a lot of fashionable ladies. </p>
<p>The commercials shoving gender stereotypes down our throats are gross, but they&#8217;re resorting to these because they&#8217;re desperate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Leah</title>
		<link>http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567679</link>
		<dc:creator>Leah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 04:31:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567679</guid>
		<description>Depending on my mood (and how my boyfriend has been in the past few days) I agree with every post above - even the conflicting ones (although I never change my mind about hating the journey pendant - damn, that thing is ugly!).

All that aside, BEST PR/ADVERTISING DEPT EVER!  This is, in non-literal terms, the female answer to the Budweiser "Mr." campaign.  You know, the one where the super official announcer salutes Mr. Still Craps His Pants while the SNL-esque singer in the background "improvises"... and every guy ALWAYS laughs... even if it's stupid.  That's how I feel about these.  'Cause the first time I see them, I'm always like, Haha!  Yeah!  And then I think about them, and when I compare them to reality, they're not so funny.  But I have to say, I appreciate a commercial that tries to entertain me, and seems to work hard in doing so.  They're funding whatever lovely TV show I'm currently watching, so if they're also doing their best to please me, who am I to say no? (Just like these "That Guy's" in the commercials.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Depending on my mood (and how my boyfriend has been in the past few days) I agree with every post above - even the conflicting ones (although I never change my mind about hating the journey pendant - damn, that thing is ugly!).</p>
<p>All that aside, BEST PR/ADVERTISING DEPT EVER!  This is, in non-literal terms, the female answer to the Budweiser &#8220;Mr.&#8221; campaign.  You know, the one where the super official announcer salutes Mr. Still Craps His Pants while the SNL-esque singer in the background &#8220;improvises&#8221;&#8230; and every guy ALWAYS laughs&#8230; even if it&#8217;s stupid.  That&#8217;s how I feel about these.  &#8216;Cause the first time I see them, I&#8217;m always like, Haha!  Yeah!  And then I think about them, and when I compare them to reality, they&#8217;re not so funny.  But I have to say, I appreciate a commercial that tries to entertain me, and seems to work hard in doing so.  They&#8217;re funding whatever lovely TV show I&#8217;m currently watching, so if they&#8217;re also doing their best to please me, who am I to say no? (Just like these &#8220;That Guy&#8217;s&#8221; in the commercials.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Winnie</title>
		<link>http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567678</link>
		<dc:creator>Winnie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 03:53:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567678</guid>
		<description>Then again I don't think the commercials were even targetted to gals so the "THAT guy or the diamonds" question is pretty moot. (The buddy-buddy guy announcer does give it away.)

It's more of humorous ad appealing to guys slight inadequecy over trying to be considerate. Everyone seems to say the guys are too effeminent and the ad is putting thoughtful gifts down. I could see it being more about appeal to the guy that says to himself "That's what girls think is the perfect man. I'd like to be spontaneously thoughtful and have the timing right, and come off romantic and sensitive and... yeah, I might not be able to pull that off." 

So they opt for the mass-produced trinket because, hey, they're always told it's the thought that counts and they were thinking about their significant other. (A bit of a punchline, it would seem.)

Personally, I'd take a guy that does a little of everything: little gifts, everyday considerations and favors, and the occassional 'going beyond the call of duty' romantic gesture.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Then again I don&#8217;t think the commercials were even targetted to gals so the &#8220;THAT guy or the diamonds&#8221; question is pretty moot. (The buddy-buddy guy announcer does give it away.)</p>
<p>It&#8217;s more of humorous ad appealing to guys slight inadequecy over trying to be considerate. Everyone seems to say the guys are too effeminent and the ad is putting thoughtful gifts down. I could see it being more about appeal to the guy that says to himself &#8220;That&#8217;s what girls think is the perfect man. I&#8217;d like to be spontaneously thoughtful and have the timing right, and come off romantic and sensitive and&#8230; yeah, I might not be able to pull that off.&#8221; </p>
<p>So they opt for the mass-produced trinket because, hey, they&#8217;re always told it&#8217;s the thought that counts and they were thinking about their significant other. (A bit of a punchline, it would seem.)</p>
<p>Personally, I&#8217;d take a guy that does a little of everything: little gifts, everyday considerations and favors, and the occassional &#8216;going beyond the call of duty&#8217; romantic gesture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: oliviacw</title>
		<link>http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567677</link>
		<dc:creator>oliviacw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 03:46:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567677</guid>
		<description>Still hate the cheap jewelry those stores peddle - would definitely take "that guy".    Doesn't even have to be a calligraphied love letter (that's my talent) - I save all the adoring "love you" type text messages my husband sends me (once every couple of months).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Still hate the cheap jewelry those stores peddle - would definitely take &#8220;that guy&#8221;.    Doesn&#8217;t even have to be a calligraphied love letter (that&#8217;s my talent) - I save all the adoring &#8220;love you&#8221; type text messages my husband sends me (once every couple of months).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Miss Lili</title>
		<link>http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567676</link>
		<dc:creator>Miss Lili</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 03:33:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567676</guid>
		<description>I thought the guy washing the dog was funny, and thoughtful. The hand-calligraphy'd "love letter" was weird -- I'd be happy if my husband made his writing merely legible.

The necklace as an option? I'd take either of the other guys.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought the guy washing the dog was funny, and thoughtful. The hand-calligraphy&#8217;d &#8220;love letter&#8221; was weird &#8212; I&#8217;d be happy if my husband made his writing merely legible.</p>
<p>The necklace as an option? I&#8217;d take either of the other guys.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emily</title>
		<link>http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567675</link>
		<dc:creator>Emily</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:07:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567675</guid>
		<description>THAT GUY, every time. Seriously, i don't even think those necklaces are pretty.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>THAT GUY, every time. Seriously, i don&#8217;t even think those necklaces are pretty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dangster</title>
		<link>http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567672</link>
		<dc:creator>dangster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:41:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567672</guid>
		<description>Actually I think I'd rather go with That Dog.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually I think I&#8217;d rather go with That Dog.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: enrie</title>
		<link>http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567670</link>
		<dc:creator>enrie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:46:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shoeblogs.com/2008/02/20/that-guy-returns/#comment-567670</guid>
		<description>Oakling--that's awesome, what a touching gesture.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oakling&#8211;that&#8217;s awesome, what a touching gesture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
