Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

***** popping out... What's the big deal?

Feb 2, 2004 9:43AM PST

I don't understand the big thing with Janet Jackson's boob "popping" out. They keep talking about it here as a big scandal because it was a family event. What is the big deal with a human body? Are people denying God's creation? I mean, I think it was stupid to do what she did, but not for the fact that a bunch of kids were able to see a boob, but because it was clearly to provoke Justin's ex-girlfriend, Britney Spears and to outdo her tongue kiss with Madonna which I find extremely childish and immature.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
That is a total copout, and hypocrisy and disregards the needs of humans.
Feb 3, 2004 9:53PM PST

1) Whether you've seen or not the Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders - well, I do not believe your statement. I have never watched American football, and I've seen the cheerleaders in movies and TV reports thousands of times.

2) Do you have a daughter or niece or a friend with a daughter? Watch her on the "twenty cents a go" rocking horse. One year old children masturbate, its called learning your body.

3) Please provide some evidence, apart from ancient church stupidity, that a child being turned on damages that child. On the contrary, I believe that denying a child the opportunity to learn their body and its responses will damage their ability to handle the demands of hormones, a system ordained by God, when poassing through puberty and needing to have a stable attitude as an adult.

Ian

- Collapse -
You certainly don't mind calling someone a liar without any evidence do you?
Feb 4, 2004 12:45AM PST

1) Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't watch much football. I loved playing it, but I find watching it is boring. I've also not seen any movies about Dallas cheerleaders, and I don't recall seeing any news reports about them. It could be that I don't watch the right channels or the right programs.

2) Yes, I do have a daughter and I probably have seen her masturbate. What's that got to do with sexualizing a child?

3) Perhaps you think that your child learning to desire sex at an early age is normal and natural, but most people don't and it doesn't have anything to do with 'ancient church stupidity' whatever that means. In fact, in the US, we have movie ratings systems that suggest the appropriate age for viewing a given movie. I could certainly do some research, but why don't you point me to psychological studies that show that sexualizing (i.e. stimulating their interest in sexual behaviour) young children does not harm them? I'm sure you'll find an abundance of such material since you are so sure of your position.

BTW, how do you intend to give your children 'the opportunity to learn their body and its responses'? Do you advocate prostitutes or other adults for these opportunities? At what age will you give them such opportunities?

- Collapse -
Protest to your heart's content, however
Feb 4, 2004 9:37PM PST

your claim that you have never seen the Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders on TV or in a movie is just plain not believable.

I didn't call you a liar, I said your claim was not believable. It still isn't. Whatever you think, you should rethink.

As regards kids seeing a teat or five: you and the dedicated to covering female bodies seem to me to be totally over the top. Has your daughter ever watched MTV?

BTW, how do you intend to give your children 'the opportunity to learn their body and its responses'? Do you advocate prostitutes or other adults for these opportunities? At what age will you give them such opportunities?

No, I do not intend to hire them prostitutes, though in reality it probably would be a good thing. Go read "The Moons a Balloon" by David Niven to get a perspective on that.

My sons are 9 and 12 - they both know what is a condom, and how to put it on. A good thing, as though they assure me they are not having sex, at least six kids in Mike's year 7 class last year were regularly consuming alcohol, smoking cigarettes and having sex.

My kids understand how to make babies, to be discreet when they wish to play with themselves, to make sure they don't get AIDS or a girl pregnant, and that it is more important to pass school than to get into a shot gun marriage at 16. They understand the stories of their cousin, who was conceived when Susie's sister had just turned 15, and didn't know who the father was, as, after all, as the Nuns tell you, you can only get pregnant from tongue kissing. See: there's the benfits of denying children honesty about how their bodies work.

Ian

- Collapse -
My sympathy goes to your children although
Feb 4, 2004 11:41PM PST

it is your prerogative to teach them as you wish. It's truly unfortunate that you haven't given them better teaching. I hope they don't get AIDS before they're done. It is a possibility with prostitutes, and, as you surely know, condoms are not very satisfying.

No, my daughter has never seen MTV. I have chosen to keep cable TV out of our home specifically because I didn't want her exposed to MTV. No, she hasn't been taught that either sex or her body are 'bad', but neither has she been encouraged to stimulate herself.

If a positive statement is made by someone, and someone else says its not believable, that's calling the original speaker a liar where I come from. That's doubly true when the original speaker reiterates the original statement, and its again labeled 'unbelievable'. However, you may be in the Bill Clinton camp where one has to define what the word 'is' means in any particular context. I have noticed however that those who cast such aspersions are usually guilty of the offense themselves.

- Collapse -
No cable here for same reason.
Feb 5, 2004 6:35AM PST

Although there are some stations like Discovery channel, and the one that shows old TV series and old Movies, and the cartoon network would be nice to have. Now they have the newer TV's that allow you to block certain channels, to where I could block out MTV and any other I find too objectionable, I may reconsider getting cable. Here between Baltimore and DC I already get about 15 channels open broadcast anyway without cable.

- Collapse -
I agree, but we've already got so many things going, and not getting done,
Feb 5, 2004 9:08AM PST

that I think even the Discovery Channel might be a waste. Now, the History channel, that's a different story!

- Collapse -
Please continue the thread...
Feb 5, 2004 10:29AM PST
- Collapse -
Re: I agree, but we've already got so many things going, and not getting done,
Feb 5, 2004 12:28PM PST

Hi, KP.

Never mind the History and Dicovery channel -- the SciFi Channel rules! A&E and BBC America are other cultural meccas in Minnow's wasteland...

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
It sure is,
Feb 5, 2004 7:54PM PST

only last week there was a special on "The lady of the lamp"

which showed her reputation was and is unjustified,

and included real photographs of people injured in the Crimean war, balls, blood, ****, corpses and all,

which would have given horror and bad dreams to children far exceeding a sexual portrayal which doesn't fit your personal beliefs.

Ian

- Collapse -
Was it being sexualized? (nt)
Feb 6, 2004 2:06AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Re: "Between Baltimore and DC"
Feb 5, 2004 12:27PM PST

Hi, James.

Let me guess -- you live in Columbia? BTW, I was born and raised in DC, whihc you may or may not recall my mentioning occasionally.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Feb 4, 2004 8:51AM PST
- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Feb 4, 2004 10:56AM PST
- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Feb 4, 2004 11:12AM PST
- Collapse -
We 3 got deleted while Ian's piece about masturbating children remained?! Incredible!! (nt)
Feb 4, 2004 12:19PM PST
Sad
- Collapse -
well, I got emailed about it, and chastised. However, I didn't breach the TOS.
Feb 4, 2004 9:23PM PST

I said to the moderators they may delete it, or any of my posts as they see fit.

As regards the lying bit, I am still incredulous that a USA citizen who watches television would claim they had never seen the Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders in their entire lives.

As regards human sexuality, anyone who has worked in a neonate ward knows that children touch their genitals from birth. And there is nothing wrong with that.

We are not that many years from boarding schools which required all students to sleep with their hands above the blankets, to ensure they did not stimulate their disgusting genitals.

I gather my attitude that a pre-pubertal child enjoying the sensations of his/her own body is an OK thing is viewed by other members as incorrect.

Well, I disagree. Is that permissible?

Ian

- Collapse -
Re:well, I got emailed about it, and chastised. However, I didn't breach the TOS.
Feb 5, 2004 3:44AM PST
"As regards human sexuality, anyone who has worked in a neonate ward knows that children touch their genitals from birth. And there is nothing wrong with that."

While that is true, the same people would have noted that they also touch their toes but that doesn't mean they are doing calesthentics Ian.

They touch the sides of their noses too but very seldom has this resulted in an observace of their disappearing up the chimney.
- Collapse -
brief advice
Feb 5, 2004 9:44PM PST

In the interests of not being banned from ZDNET, I have made a commitment to not read nor respond to your posts.

You get up my nose. My replies to you get up CNET's nose. Such is life.

Ian

- Collapse -
Sounds great, but boy what a nose that must be...(NT)
Feb 6, 2004 2:50AM PST
- Collapse -
*handing ian a few 'greys' for his paintbox*
Feb 5, 2004 10:22PM PST

scenario:

15yr old girl in shower with 47yr old male. ok?

*i'll give you a hint* they are stark naked and very happy! lots of hugs and kisses*
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
well, if it's the TV repairman, her father would probably shoot the guy, but as it is, it's her father, they live in sweden/holland/germany/wherever and it's not "frowned" at, and they are apre sauna and papa has just told her that mama is pregnant......

sheesh, tain't all B&W ian

- Collapse -
yeah, it isn't,
Feb 5, 2004 10:58PM PST

one of the causes of Susie's leaving her first husband was his insistence that showering with his mother, that her afterwords sitting naked on his bum whilst she massaged his back and neck was not sexual behaviour, which I think it certainly is.

Northern Italian family, Aussie immigrants a century before.

Ian'

- Collapse -
I totally agree James!
Feb 5, 2004 3:20AM PST

Ian can spout off his views on crap like this and when we call him on it we are viewed as breaching the TOS? Amazing! Sick of sex education per Ian!

Glenda

- Collapse -
Re: I totally agree James!
Feb 5, 2004 12:25PM PST

Hi, Glenda.

>>Ian can spout off his views <<
You got it in one! You can certainly express your disagreement with his views -- that's part of what the forum's about. But when you cross over the line into attacking him for holding those views, it's a violation of the TOS. He has as much a right to his views as you and James do to yours. NOW, if he were advocating something illegal, that would be another matter entirely. And, btw, he was not chastised for his views, but for a section of his message that was bordering on an attack on another member.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Feb 5, 2004 9:35PM PST
- Collapse -
Well that's a sick misinterpretation, and I'm sad that you had to regenerate it .
Feb 5, 2004 10:28PM PST

As a matter of fact, the story of young girls on a rocking horse in a shopping centre is Susie's story about her niece.

I hold what in Australia is called a "blue card". This means I and my wife and children have been investigated by the Queensland Police and determined to be a good environment for the care and protection of children.

That I disagree with the religious determination of "correct" behaviour is understandable, and if you'd read and comprehended the issues I've reported over the past several years, you wouldn't be so "holier than that jerk" about me.

Since the day I copied and posted a joke, which raised the ire of the "we screwed you in the FOS attack, but were sent away and now attack anyone who visits that place" I have been facing this "Ian, BAD, not Ian, GOOD" approach to everything I say.

The five people who comprise "semods4" and Lee Koo know that my claims about the fora backups are true, and in email DE was very polite and friendly to me. In Speakeasy, DE ignores my existence, and I've read far to many posts about your BBQ discussions about the scumbag from OZ.

I'm the same person Glenda appeared to like. Its the assumption that what DE said about me on forum, totally contrary to what he said about me in email, and the defence of Evie from an attack that wasn't, that has lead to this ever increasing villification.

Well, I'm a good parent, as is Sue. And ignoring that sexuality is the primary motivator of human action (as long as one is fed) is, frankly, your lack of understanding of the society in which you live.

Ian

- Collapse -
Hope you feel better now ...
Feb 5, 2004 10:45PM PST

... relate the story as it was then, don't tell people to go watch girls on rocking horses. As I said in the other post, it is you that fails to understand that just because the anatomy and sensations are there, children need not be sexualized in the manner we recognize as adults or post pubescent humans.

I got "married" in the 2nd grade. I remember "liking" a boy in the 6th grade mostly because that's when a few "couples" formed which were mostly copying adult pairing. The fact that I didn't learn exactly what sex was and how a baby was made until my parents gave me a book (I think I was 14 at the time) then answered any questions I had did not lead to any dire consequences, rather the opposite. It's very sad that these days any of your boy's class mates are having sex Sad

Your victim act is already getting old ...

- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Feb 5, 2004 11:23PM PST
- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Feb 5, 2004 11:29PM PST
- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Feb 5, 2004 11:42PM PST
- Collapse -
Re: Hope you feel better now ...
Feb 6, 2004 2:35AM PST

Hi, Evie.

>>The fact that I didn't learn exactly what sex was and how a baby was made until my parents gave me a book (I think I was 14 at the time) then answered any questions I had did not lead to any dire consequences, rather the opposite.<<
How wonderful for you. OTOH, there are many girls who have become pregnant, or girls and boys been infected with STD or even AIDS due to sexual activities below that age. The lack of knowledge is indeed a dangerous thing.

-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!