Woman sues over Janet's breast

Lezmaka said:
Aivansama said:
Sadly this technology hasn't been introduced here. It would be really cool if parents didn't have to spend precious free time watching stuff with kids, buit could spend it as they please. Kind of like the netnanny stuff that's protecting children from online predators, without parents having to watch where the offspring is surfing.
Click to expand...

I see, just let technology raise the children, the parents go off and do what they want and blame someone/something else when they visit a porn site not blocked by the filter.
Click to expand...

No one is saying that . But te tech can help parents deciede and make thier job easier .

Example .

A parent doesn't want a child watching hbo 1-3 but doesn't midn them watching hbo family .

Now the father is home making dinner. The 8 year old is on the couch watching tv .

How can the father watch the child and what the child is while preparing dinner ? He is either going to leave the house at risk and the child by leaving oven on or a burner on or leave the kid by himself .

With the v chip he knows his child can't watch programs the child shouldn't be watching .


Problem with this world is everyone only wants whats good for them. They forget about everyone else and whats good for everyone .


Yes it be nice if I as a 22 year old kid can put on fox and watch the paris hilton sex tape . But is it good for all the children in this country ? No its not .

That is why i would never fight for that right , or stand to let that happen .
 
Maybe the father should have the kid in the kitchen instead of using the TV as a babysitter.

Anyway, I was referring more to internet filters than V chip. With TV, ratings are pretty much mandatory for everything, so it'll block most content. Internet filters basically suck.
 
arjan de lumens said:
Sex on TV? Well, here in Norway, they actually sent "In The Realm Of The Senses" (famous Japanese erotic movie, quite sexually graphic) on public TV - around 8pm a few months ago, IIRC. Which drew surprisingly little outrage.
Click to expand...
Yes, we got that one in Finland also on public channels a few years ago. Nobody seemed to mind. I think that was because it was listed as an artistic movie, the usual suspects didn't watch it and therefore forgot to cry havoc and let loose the dogs of moral.
 
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

*breathe*

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Erm... this is all. Thank you for listening.
 
jvd said:
It had no place being shown at the time . How people defend it . I don't know . But hey keep saying the lines should be blurred . One day people will be saying child porn should be allowed to be shown on tv . Then what will you say . WHere will you draw the line ?
Click to expand...

Why need the line be drawn by the tits? If tits aren't suitable, then so aren't most of the movies, reality shows or even many cartoons with all the violence in them.
 
Humus said:
Why need the line be drawn by the tits? If tits aren't suitable, then so aren't most of the movies, reality shows or even many cartoons with all the violence in them.
Click to expand...

That's the great double-standard in American society. And I used to argue this example back in the '80s: make a movie depicting Arnold killing 100 people in 100 gruesome ways and it might get a PG-13 rating, yet in that same film have Arnold get out of the shower naked for 2 seconds and baby that's an immediate R.
 
John Reynolds said:
That's the great double-standard in American society. And I used to argue this example back in the '80s: make a movie depicting Arnold killing 100 people in 100 gruesome ways and it might get a PG-13 rating, yet in that same film have Arnold get out of the shower naked for 2 seconds and baby that's an immediate R.
Click to expand...


Not sure there would be much to see there... Steroids DO have effects you know...


[Sorry couldn't resist]...
 
Humus said:
... or even many cartoons with all the violence in them.
Click to expand...
Hey, but there's no bare skin. Why do folks keep bringing violence into discussion what's appropriate for children? Surely there is enough to worry about possible sexual undertones without needing to worry about the gore.
 
This website must be dominated by a bunch of teens with no sense. It's simple, Janet crossed the line, period. "Tits" dont belong in the super bowl.

If the super bowl was rated "R" then it would be a different story. Spare me the "nude is natural"......."it's just a tit" bullshit. I shouldn't have to "change the channel if I dont like it". Where's my right as a citizen??? I'm not saying that nudity on T.V should be banned. But nudity has it's place. The super bowl ( for the time being) isn't one of those places.
 
Stlr22 said:
This website must be dominated by a bunch of teens with no sense. It's simple, Janet crossed the line, period. "Tits" dont belong in the super bowl.

If the super bowl was rated "R" then it would be a different story. Spare me the "nude is natural"......."it's just a tit" bullshit. I shouldn't have to "change the channel if I dont like it". Where's my right as a citizen??? I'm not saying that nudity on T.V should be banned. But nudity has it's place. The super bowl ( for the time being) isn't one of those places.
Click to expand...


Yeah, that's the place someone can peacefully see a bunch of guys trying to break each others bones. Unacceptable. :|
 
Oh come on get over it! I'm gay, and don't really find Janet's pierced artificially enhanced breast in any way appealing to me, and i don't see what the big deal is. Really.

The only big deal is that it was extremely tasteless and cheap, but taking this into politics is a bit too much...
 
this is STUPID! Just about every child has had their mouth on a tit and their head in a vagina so WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL? Now, very few children have seen someone have their head blown off and leave a giant bloody stain on the wall behind them. And, if you want to talk about what's "good" for kids then seeing everyone get so worried about showing their bodies is far worse than the opposite- it teaches children that they should be ashamed of their bodies and, later in life, of their own totally natural sexual urges. It teaches them that sex is bad, so then if they are having sex you're a bad person, and bad people do other bad things like have unprotected sex with multiple partners. Americans need to get their heads out of the sand and look around- just because you can't see sex doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Only when people embrace sex and the human body as something natural and beutiful will they start to respect themselves; the current mindset of "sex is bad" is just driving society to become more perverted and twisted and do more "bad" things.
 
Well the "American people" are divided by different races, opinions and religious beliefs.

So when people were upset and offended about Janet's stunt then fine. That's them. Just because others were not offended doesn't make those people "right" or more "open minded".
 
Look around you in this country, just about every damn thing is sexualy related. Now are those models and singers and movie stars and many other portions of the media that constantly push sexual related content have FAT people??

Depression is at an all time high with teens becuase of the open sexuality in america and in general. All they see is skinny ( beautiful) , sexy people all over the media. Your not "sexy" or "hot" if you cant dress like a damn slut for crying out loud. But of course, it's not dressing like a slut, it's just being sexy or cute. The fact theres "teen magazines" out there with the focus on being "sexy" makes me sick.
 
Sage said:
this is STUPID! Just about every child has had their mouth on a tit and their head in a vagina so WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL? Now, very few children have seen someone have their head blown off and leave a giant bloody stain on the wall behind them. And, if you want to talk about what's "good" for kids then seeing everyone get so worried about showing their bodies is far worse than the opposite- it teaches children that they should be ashamed of their bodies and, later in life, of their own totally natural sexual urges. It teaches them that sex is bad, so then if they are having sex you're a bad person, and bad people do other bad things like have unprotected sex with multiple partners. Americans need to get their heads out of the sand and look around- just because you can't see sex doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Only when people embrace sex and the human body as something natural and beutiful will they start to respect themselves; the current mindset of "sex is bad" is just driving society to become more perverted and twisted and do more "bad" things.
Click to expand...

You put into comprehensible words the confused mass of thoughts flying in my head with regards to this subject.
 
You know, "it's the inside that counts". That's why it's ok so show blood and bowels, but no ok to show skin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top