Apparently CBS execs OK'd the Janet bewbie thing...

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8
So we can show sports with men beating each other up, people eating weird things and doing dangerous things, but if half a boob is shown for 3-5 seconds that is crossing the line?

Yes and we can have boxing matches, GTA Vice City with half naked women in it, as long as the parent is aware and forewarned of the content. They know that boxing involves people beating each other to a pulp, and hockey. They know that if they buy their kids GTA, there is nudity in it. They did not know a T!T would come flying out of JJ during a PG rated show. That's like the video game Mario Cart and Mario's penis comes out for 2 seconds b/c he took a turn too sharp while Luigi had his hand on Mario's pants riding shotgun; the programmer made it so that the "joke" only appeared on a certain date so nobody knew about it in advance.

To reiterate for the 20th time in this thread, the parent was disempowered when CBS/MTV broke the law.

I'm just wondering why violence is so accepted among the parents on this forum, but nudity (however minor and brief) is not.

That's not the point. You do what you want with your kids. I'll have my opinions and I have a right to let my kids see what I want them to see. You don't have to agree, but I have a right to raise my kids the way I want to. Tell me beforehand that there will be nudity involved. That's it.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8
So we can show sports with men beating each other up, people eating weird things and doing dangerous things, but if half a boob is shown for 3-5 seconds that is crossing the line?

Yes and we can have boxing matches, GTA Vice City with half naked women in it, as long as the parent is aware and forewarned of the content. They know that boxing involves people beating each other to a pulp, and hockey. They know that if they buy their kids GTA, there is nudity in it. They did not know a T!T would come flying out of JJ during a PG rated show. That's like the video game Mario Cart and Mario's penis comes out for 2 seconds b/c he took a turn too sharp while Luigi had his hand on Mario's pants riding shotgun; the programmer made it so that the "joke" only appeared on a certain date so nobody knew about it in advance.

To reiterate for the 20th time in this thread, the parent was disempowered when CBS/MTV broke the law.

I'm just wondering why violence is so accepted among the parents on this forum, but nudity (however minor and brief) is not.

Good question, there are many variables that come into play, I don't have the answer for you. It's sort of the same question as to why our society views drinking as an acceptable drug vice marijuana, when drinking is physically and psychologically addicting whereas marijuana is the latter. Not to mention more families will be broken up by alcohol addiction, and alcohol abusers are much more likely to exhibit acts of violence (bar fights). Why is one legal, or illegal, and the other not?

The magnitude of how each "inappropriate" act/thing in our culture varies for many reasons.

 

[brigden]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8
So we can show sports with men beating each other up, people eating weird things and doing dangerous things, but if half a boob is shown for 3-5 seconds that is crossing the line?

Yes and we can have boxing matches, GTA Vice City with half naked women in it, as long as the parent is aware and forewarned of the content. They know that boxing involves people beating each other to a pulp, and hockey. They know that if they buy their kids GTA, there is nudity in it. They did not know a T!T would come flying out of JJ during a PG rated show. That's like the video game Mario Cart and Mario's penis comes out for 2 seconds b/c he took a turn too sharp while Luigi had his hand on Mario's pants riding shotgun; the programmer made it so that the "joke" only appeared on a certain date so nobody knew about it in advance.

To reiterate for the 20th time in this thread, the parent was disempowered when CBS/MTV broke the law.

I'm just wondering why violence is so accepted among the parents on this forum, but nudity (however minor and brief) is not.

That's not the point. You do what you want with your kids. I'll have my opinions and I have a right to let my kids see what I want them to see. You don't have to agree, but I have a right to raise my kids the way I want to. Tell me beforehand that there will be nudity involved. That's it.

You're still pushing your moral code on me, and I don't like it. It's people like you, with your ridiculous and puritanical views on sex and nudity that cause more harm to our youth than a brief flash of a woman's bare breast ever will.

Where I live women are allowed to go topless in public. Would you like them to walk around shouting a disclaimer just incase one of your children catches a glimpse?

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: SampSon
Who cares.

not i

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8
So we can show sports with men beating each other up, people eating weird things and doing dangerous things, but if half a boob is shown for 3-5 seconds that is crossing the line?

Yes and we can have boxing matches, GTA Vice City with half naked women in it, as long as the parent is aware and forewarned of the content. They know that boxing involves people beating each other to a pulp, and hockey. They know that if they buy their kids GTA, there is nudity in it. They did not know a T!T would come flying out of JJ during a PG rated show. That's like the video game Mario Cart and Mario's penis comes out for 2 seconds b/c he took a turn too sharp while Luigi had his hand on Mario's pants riding shotgun; the programmer made it so that the "joke" only appeared on a certain date so nobody knew about it in advance.

To reiterate for the 20th time in this thread, the parent was disempowered when CBS/MTV broke the law.

I'm just wondering why violence is so accepted among the parents on this forum, but nudity (however minor and brief) is not.

That's not the point. You do what you want with your kids. I'll have my opinions and I have a right to let my kids see what I want them to see. You don't have to agree, but I have a right to raise my kids the way I want to. Tell me beforehand that there will be nudity involved. That's it.

You're still pushing your moral code on me, and I don't like it. It's people like you, with your ridiculous and puritanical views on sex and nudity that cause more harm to our youth than a brief flash of a woman's bare breast ever will.

Where I live women are allowed to go topless in public. Would you like them to walk around shouting a disclaimer just incase one of your children catches a glimpse?

HOW THE FVCK AM I PUSHING MY VIEWS ON YOU?! By asking to tell me beforehand? Quite the contrary! If you don't tell me beforehand then it's YOU and your ilk pushing your views on me. I'd love to hear this answer.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8
So we can show sports with men beating each other up, people eating weird things and doing dangerous things, but if half a boob is shown for 3-5 seconds that is crossing the line?

Yes and we can have boxing matches, GTA Vice City with half naked women in it, as long as the parent is aware and forewarned of the content. They know that boxing involves people beating each other to a pulp, and hockey. They know that if they buy their kids GTA, there is nudity in it. They did not know a T!T would come flying out of JJ during a PG rated show. That's like the video game Mario Cart and Mario's penis comes out for 2 seconds b/c he took a turn too sharp while Luigi had his hand on Mario's pants riding shotgun; the programmer made it so that the "joke" only appeared on a certain date so nobody knew about it in advance.

To reiterate for the 20th time in this thread, the parent was disempowered when CBS/MTV broke the law.

I'm just wondering why violence is so accepted among the parents on this forum, but nudity (however minor and brief) is not.

That's not the point. You do what you want with your kids. I'll have my opinions and I have a right to let my kids see what I want them to see. You don't have to agree, but I have a right to raise my kids the way I want to. Tell me beforehand that there will be nudity involved. That's it.

You're still pushing your moral code on me, and I don't like it. It's people like you, with your ridiculous and puritanical views on sex and nudity that cause more harm to our youth than a brief flash of a woman's bare breast ever will.

Where I live women are allowed to go topless in public. Would you like them to walk around shouting a disclaimer just incase one of your children catches a glimpse?

Yes, I'd love for that to happen. Consequently, she would be slapped with indecent exposure so quickly that you'd be a chimp not to realize the hilarity of your statement. Try this WHERE I LIVE, I'd love it. Hell, we may even get the cops to charge her with corruption of a minor depending on the severity of the incident, they'd love to hear her excuses before cuffing and stuffing her in the paddywagon.

EDIT: You must live in France or Ke-BEC, or a nudist colony. Please enlighten us as to your location.

 

[pulse8]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8
So we can show sports with men beating each other up, people eating weird things and doing dangerous things, but if half a boob is shown for 3-5 seconds that is crossing the line?

Yes and we can have boxing matches, GTA Vice City with half naked women in it, as long as the parent is aware and forewarned of the content. They know that boxing involves people beating each other to a pulp, and hockey. They know that if they buy their kids GTA, there is nudity in it. They did not know a T!T would come flying out of JJ during a PG rated show. That's like the video game Mario Cart and Mario's penis comes out for 2 seconds b/c he took a turn too sharp while Luigi had his hand on Mario's pants riding shotgun; the programmer made it so that the "joke" only appeared on a certain date so nobody knew about it in advance.

To reiterate for the 20th time in this thread, the parent was disempowered when CBS/MTV broke the law.

I'm just wondering why violence is so accepted among the parents on this forum, but nudity (however minor and brief) is not.

Good question, there are many variables that come into play, I don't have the answer for you. It's sort of the same question as to why our society views drinking as an acceptable drug vice marijuana, when drinking is physically and psychologically addicting whereas marijuana is the latter. Not to mention more families will be broken up by alcohol addiction, and alcohol abusers are much more likely to exhibit acts of violence (bar fights). Why is one legal, or illegal, and the other not?

The magnitude of how each "inappropriate" act/thing in our culture varies for many reasons.

I wasn't wondering why society accepts one over the other, I was wondering why YOU accept one over the other.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: aRCeNiTe

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
After reading the ENTIRE thread, it's painfully obvious that there are two sets of opinions: The parents, or people who are mature enough to think from a parents' point of view, and the non parents. It's also painfully obvious that parents such as conjur and thepresence could very well be arguing with people half their age. I'm not even going to bother with responding to anyone in this thread, due to the idiotic repetition of responses that will sure to be posted.

The overall summary: CBS, MTV, and the NFL's reputations are now tarnished by a slut named Janet Jackson, and her wigger accomplice Timberflake. It was inappropriate and highly distasteful to show a bare T!T on TV, you will not even see this on MTV (and if you have, it's most likely NOT a common occurence because my little cousins watch it all the time). It's against the FCC's regulations to have a PG rated show turned R, I don't give a flying fvck what you Europeans have to say, if you think that it's right, then GET THE HELL OUT OUR COUNTRY. We have rules here that are to be followed.

Many of my coworkers said that luckily their kids did not see this fvcking trash that is to be called the halftime show. I agree with them. We don't have sluts in the mall walking around with their T!T out, do we? How about in the gym? Better yet, another public place, the park?

These fvcking artists are always trying to push the envelope, and guess what, they went too far this time. What's on next year's agenda? Britney showing her crotch? Would you geeks be ok with this? Of course you would, cuz you haven't had p*ssy in, let's say, your whole life. Now I finally see where you're coming from!

Last but not least, any woman who did this in the states that I've lived in (NJ, NY, VA, MD, DE, and yes even WV) would be arrested for indecent exposure and corruption of a minor (if a male had ripped it off in front of kids). That's what makes this country so great, is our first amendment rights. But that's also why we have LAWS.

Kudos to all the parents who know how to raise their kids the right way, and understand that kids should be able to enjoy their childhood before growing up. To all the non parents who think this was an acceptable act: One day, you will reach a level of maturity and empathsize. That is all, back to your regular scheduled immature geekspeak where omg, b00bs are sooooooo cool!!!!!! Yeah dude!!!!!!

nice racist slur...


Im 35 and have 3 kids. I do know how to raise my kids and my 10 and 7 year old daughters saw what happend last night. My wife and I did not make it a big deal and they were ho-hum about it, it was no big deal to them. Im raising my kids the right way, maybe you should take a parenting class and learn something.

How would you feel if your daughter came home from high school crying, and said she was assaulted (inappropriately touched) on her breasts? The boy would say, I saw Justin do it so why is it wrong? Your ignorance and advocation breeds the perpetuation of an overly sexual society, and we are passive until IT HITS HOME.

It's because of those goddamn black people and their rap music!

WTF is your problem? Not all black people listen to rap, and not all people who listen to rap are black. You need to get off your high horse and start sucking it's c@ck.

Bill

I must assume you are illiterate.

 

[labrat25]

I seriously doubt that...

 

[brigden]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8
So we can show sports with men beating each other up, people eating weird things and doing dangerous things, but if half a boob is shown for 3-5 seconds that is crossing the line?

Yes and we can have boxing matches, GTA Vice City with half naked women in it, as long as the parent is aware and forewarned of the content. They know that boxing involves people beating each other to a pulp, and hockey. They know that if they buy their kids GTA, there is nudity in it. They did not know a T!T would come flying out of JJ during a PG rated show. That's like the video game Mario Cart and Mario's penis comes out for 2 seconds b/c he took a turn too sharp while Luigi had his hand on Mario's pants riding shotgun; the programmer made it so that the "joke" only appeared on a certain date so nobody knew about it in advance.

To reiterate for the 20th time in this thread, the parent was disempowered when CBS/MTV broke the law.

I'm just wondering why violence is so accepted among the parents on this forum, but nudity (however minor and brief) is not.

That's not the point. You do what you want with your kids. I'll have my opinions and I have a right to let my kids see what I want them to see. You don't have to agree, but I have a right to raise my kids the way I want to. Tell me beforehand that there will be nudity involved. That's it.

You're still pushing your moral code on me, and I don't like it. It's people like you, with your ridiculous and puritanical views on sex and nudity that cause more harm to our youth than a brief flash of a woman's bare breast ever will.

Where I live women are allowed to go topless in public. Would you like them to walk around shouting a disclaimer just incase one of your children catches a glimpse?

HOW THE FVCK AM I PUSHING MY VIEWS ON YOU?! By asking to tell me beforehand? Quite the contrary! If you don't tell me beforehand then it's YOU and your ilk pushing your views on me. I'd love to hear this answer.

YOU think it's unacceptable that there's nudity on television. YOU think the world should warn YOU when there may be brief, partial nudity. YOU feel this is going to somehow damage YOUR children. YOU are the minority, YOUR morals are antiquated.

Why should I be forced to sit through warnings and disclaimers every time I open my eyes because a few ignorant people might get their panties in a twist.

Assume you're vacationing in another part of the world and you don't like the nudity you see in a magazine advertisment for bath soap, do you complain and bitch?

 

[Thraxen]

Hell, we may even get the cops to charge her with corruption of a minor depending on the severity of the incident, they'd love to hear her excuses before cuffing and stuffing her in the paddywagon.

Heh... that reply really has nothing to do with what he is driving at. But answer me this... what exactly does a bare breast do to cause "corruption of a minor"? That is the real crux of the debate. Again, I must point out that nudity is only viewed badly because people like you react badly to it.... but why is it bad? Explain.

 

[ThePresence]

YOU think it's unacceptable that there's nudity on television. YOU think the world should warn YOU when there may be brief, partial nudity. YOU feel this is going to somehow damage YOUR children. YOU are the minority, YOUR morals are antiquated.

Why should I be forced to sit through warnings and disclaimers every time I open my eyes because a few ignorant people might get their panties in a twist.

Assume you're vacationing in another part of the world and you don't like the nudity you see in a magazine advertisment for bath soap, do you complain and bitch?

So because YOU want to see nudity on PUBLIC TV during PRIME TIME when kids are probably watching, and all I want is a warning, it's ME pushing my views on YOU. OMFG! ATOT never ceases to amaze me.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8
So we can show sports with men beating each other up, people eating weird things and doing dangerous things, but if half a boob is shown for 3-5 seconds that is crossing the line?

Yes and we can have boxing matches, GTA Vice City with half naked women in it, as long as the parent is aware and forewarned of the content. They know that boxing involves people beating each other to a pulp, and hockey. They know that if they buy their kids GTA, there is nudity in it. They did not know a T!T would come flying out of JJ during a PG rated show. That's like the video game Mario Cart and Mario's penis comes out for 2 seconds b/c he took a turn too sharp while Luigi had his hand on Mario's pants riding shotgun; the programmer made it so that the "joke" only appeared on a certain date so nobody knew about it in advance.

To reiterate for the 20th time in this thread, the parent was disempowered when CBS/MTV broke the law.

I'm just wondering why violence is so accepted among the parents on this forum, but nudity (however minor and brief) is not.

Good question, there are many variables that come into play, I don't have the answer for you. It's sort of the same question as to why our society views drinking as an acceptable drug vice marijuana, when drinking is physically and psychologically addicting whereas marijuana is the latter. Not to mention more families will be broken up by alcohol addiction, and alcohol abusers are much more likely to exhibit acts of violence (bar fights). Why is one legal, or illegal, and the other not?

The magnitude of how each "inappropriate" act/thing in our culture varies for many reasons.

I wasn't wondering why society accepts one over the other, I was wondering why YOU accept one over the other.

I was generalizing for our culture, which includes AT parents. Doesn't mean that I am included in that group.

I don't think violence is better than nudity. You haven't defined violence yet. Are you talking about sports? Wrestling? Movies? Punching and kicking or weapons? Blood vs no blood? Please clarify. There is a line to be drawn in the magnitude of violence, just as the bikini is where the line is drawn for the kids. Give an example.

 

[Mill]

And if this was an accident?

 

[brigden]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8
So we can show sports with men beating each other up, people eating weird things and doing dangerous things, but if half a boob is shown for 3-5 seconds that is crossing the line?

Yes and we can have boxing matches, GTA Vice City with half naked women in it, as long as the parent is aware and forewarned of the content. They know that boxing involves people beating each other to a pulp, and hockey. They know that if they buy their kids GTA, there is nudity in it. They did not know a T!T would come flying out of JJ during a PG rated show. That's like the video game Mario Cart and Mario's penis comes out for 2 seconds b/c he took a turn too sharp while Luigi had his hand on Mario's pants riding shotgun; the programmer made it so that the "joke" only appeared on a certain date so nobody knew about it in advance.

To reiterate for the 20th time in this thread, the parent was disempowered when CBS/MTV broke the law.

I'm just wondering why violence is so accepted among the parents on this forum, but nudity (however minor and brief) is not.

That's not the point. You do what you want with your kids. I'll have my opinions and I have a right to let my kids see what I want them to see. You don't have to agree, but I have a right to raise my kids the way I want to. Tell me beforehand that there will be nudity involved. That's it.

You're still pushing your moral code on me, and I don't like it. It's people like you, with your ridiculous and puritanical views on sex and nudity that cause more harm to our youth than a brief flash of a woman's bare breast ever will.

Where I live women are allowed to go topless in public. Would you like them to walk around shouting a disclaimer just incase one of your children catches a glimpse?

Yes, I'd love for that to happen. Consequently, she would be slapped with indecent exposure so quickly that you'd be a chimp not to realize the hilarity of your statement. Try this WHERE I LIVE, I'd love it. Hell, we may even get the cops to charge her with corruption of a minor depending on the severity of the incident, they'd love to hear her excuses before cuffing and stuffing her in the paddywagon.

EDIT: You must live in France or Ke-BEC, or a nudist colony. Please enlighten us as to your location.

I live in Ontario, dipsh!t.

After reading several of your posts I am now completely convinced you are the biggest idiot on this forum. I am shocked that people like you actually exist today.

 

[brigden]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

YOU think it's unacceptable that there's nudity on television. YOU think the world should warn YOU when there may be brief, partial nudity. YOU feel this is going to somehow damage YOUR children. YOU are the minority, YOUR morals are antiquated.

Why should I be forced to sit through warnings and disclaimers every time I open my eyes because a few ignorant people might get their panties in a twist.

Assume you're vacationing in another part of the world and you don't like the nudity you see in a magazine advertisment for bath soap, do you complain and bitch?

So because YOU want to see nudity on PUBLIC TV during PRIME TIME when kids are probably watching, and all I want is a warning, it's ME pushing my views on YOU. OMFG! ATOT never ceases to amaze me.

There's the difference, dullard. I don't want to see nudity, but it doesn't upset me when it does occur because I am normal, well-balanced and rational... unlike you.

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: ThePresence

YOU think it's unacceptable that there's nudity on television. YOU think the world should warn YOU when there may be brief, partial nudity. YOU feel this is going to somehow damage YOUR children. YOU are the minority, YOUR morals are antiquated.

Why should I be forced to sit through warnings and disclaimers every time I open my eyes because a few ignorant people might get their panties in a twist.

Assume you're vacationing in another part of the world and you don't like the nudity you see in a magazine advertisment for bath soap, do you complain and bitch?

So because YOU want to see nudity on PUBLIC TV during PRIME TIME when kids are probably watching, and all I want is a warning, it's ME pushing my views on YOU. OMFG! ATOT never ceases to amaze me.

There's the difference, dullard. I don't want to see nudity, but it doesn't upset me when it does occur because I am normal, well-balanced and rational... unlike you.

So it doesn't upset you. Yippee, we're all proud of you, you are so enlightened. I really don't give a flying fvck about what upsets you and not. All I want is to be able to make a decison to watch something or not. If there will be nudity, tell me first so I can then choose to watch it or not. My kids don't have to see boobs on stage because it doesn't upset you. Sheesh, I'm done arguing with obviously immature youngsters who don't yet understand life.

 

[Pixelated]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Hell, we may even get the cops to charge her with corruption of a minor depending on the severity of the incident, they'd love to hear her excuses before cuffing and stuffing her in the paddywagon.

Heh... that reply really has nothing to do with what he is driving at. But answer me this... what exactly does a bare breast do to cause "corruption of a minor"? That is the real crux of the debate. Again, I must point out that nudity is only viewed badly because people like you react badly to it.... but why is it bad? Explain.

I'm also curious to know why some people view nudity as wrong. I'm not talking about porn, just the issue at hand.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Hell, we may even get the cops to charge her with corruption of a minor depending on the severity of the incident, they'd love to hear her excuses before cuffing and stuffing her in the paddywagon.

Heh... that reply really has nothing to do with what he is driving at. But answer me this... what exactly does a bare breast do to cause "corruption of a minor"? That is the real crux of the debate. Again, I must point out that nudity is only viewed badly because people like you react badly to it.... but why is it bad? Explain.

Sure. The context was disgusting, to have a male grab a woman's mammary/ies in a sexual manner and strip her naked in a PG rated show.

IF the woman, from my previous post, had assaulted the child then it would be corruption of a minor in OH and many other states.. Like I said, it depends on the severity of the incident. No, a bare b00b wouldn't warrant that charge, but it would still be indecent exposure. My kid should be allowed to enjoy his/her childhood and not worry about adult themes at such a young age.

 

He could have at least ripped a decent looking chicks bra off. Janet Jackson looks like she fell of the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down. She was cute in the 80's but the Jackson curse smacked her down over the last few years.

 

[brigden]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: ThePresence

YOU think it's unacceptable that there's nudity on television. YOU think the world should warn YOU when there may be brief, partial nudity. YOU feel this is going to somehow damage YOUR children. YOU are the minority, YOUR morals are antiquated.

Why should I be forced to sit through warnings and disclaimers every time I open my eyes because a few ignorant people might get their panties in a twist.

Assume you're vacationing in another part of the world and you don't like the nudity you see in a magazine advertisment for bath soap, do you complain and bitch?

So because YOU want to see nudity on PUBLIC TV during PRIME TIME when kids are probably watching, and all I want is a warning, it's ME pushing my views on YOU. OMFG! ATOT never ceases to amaze me.

There's the difference, dullard. I don't want to see nudity, but it doesn't upset me when it does occur because I am normal, well-balanced and rational... unlike you.

So it doesn't upset you. Yippee, we're all proud of you, you are so enlightened. I really don't give a flying fvck about what upsets you and not. All I want is to be able to make a decison to watch something or not. If there will be nudity, tell me first so I can then choose to watch it or not. My kids don't have to see boobs on stage because it doesn't upset you. Sheesh, I'm done arguing with obviously immature youngsters who don't yet understand life.

Of course you don't care what upsets me, or not. You're only interested in making sure that television and other media conforms to your standards.

And thank you for making a wonderful assumption on my age and level of maturity. And since you seem to be in a giving mood, please enlighten me on the way life is meant to be lived. I obviously lack guidance, I mean, what with a two second shot of a woman's breast not upsetting me. Please, how should I live my life?

 

[Thraxen]

My kid should be allowed to enjoy his/her childhood and not worry about adult themes at such a young age.

But, again, what is there to "worry" about? It's just a bare breast. Kids can all see that adult women have them, so why is a bare breast something to "worry" about? It's parents, like yourself, that have trained your kids to think it is bad, but why should it be?

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: ThePresence

YOU think it's unacceptable that there's nudity on television. YOU think the world should warn YOU when there may be brief, partial nudity. YOU feel this is going to somehow damage YOUR children. YOU are the minority, YOUR morals are antiquated.

Why should I be forced to sit through warnings and disclaimers every time I open my eyes because a few ignorant people might get their panties in a twist.

Assume you're vacationing in another part of the world and you don't like the nudity you see in a magazine advertisment for bath soap, do you complain and bitch?

So because YOU want to see nudity on PUBLIC TV during PRIME TIME when kids are probably watching, and all I want is a warning, it's ME pushing my views on YOU. OMFG! ATOT never ceases to amaze me.

There's the difference, dullard. I don't want to see nudity, but it doesn't upset me when it does occur because I am normal, well-balanced and rational... unlike you.

So it doesn't upset you. Yippee, we're all proud of you, you are so enlightened. I really don't give a flying fvck about what upsets you and not. All I want is to be able to make a decison to watch something or not. If there will be nudity, tell me first so I can then choose to watch it or not. My kids don't have to see boobs on stage because it doesn't upset you. Sheesh, I'm done arguing with obviously immature youngsters who don't yet understand life.

Of course you don't care what upsets me, or not. You're only interested in making sure that television and other media conforms to your standards.

And thank you for making a wonderful assumption on my age and level of maturity. And since you seem to be in a giving mood, please enlighten me on the way life is meant to be lived. I obviously lack guidance, I mean, what with a two second shot of a woman's breast not upsetting me. Please, how should I live my life?

Okay, let me ask you this. Would you have a problem if they both ripped off their clothes and started humping wildly on stage?

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: pulse8
So we can show sports with men beating each other up, people eating weird things and doing dangerous things, but if half a boob is shown for 3-5 seconds that is crossing the line?

Yes and we can have boxing matches, GTA Vice City with half naked women in it, as long as the parent is aware and forewarned of the content. They know that boxing involves people beating each other to a pulp, and hockey. They know that if they buy their kids GTA, there is nudity in it. They did not know a T!T would come flying out of JJ during a PG rated show. That's like the video game Mario Cart and Mario's penis comes out for 2 seconds b/c he took a turn too sharp while Luigi had his hand on Mario's pants riding shotgun; the programmer made it so that the "joke" only appeared on a certain date so nobody knew about it in advance.

To reiterate for the 20th time in this thread, the parent was disempowered when CBS/MTV broke the law.

I'm just wondering why violence is so accepted among the parents on this forum, but nudity (however minor and brief) is not.

That's not the point. You do what you want with your kids. I'll have my opinions and I have a right to let my kids see what I want them to see. You don't have to agree, but I have a right to raise my kids the way I want to. Tell me beforehand that there will be nudity involved. That's it.

You're still pushing your moral code on me, and I don't like it. It's people like you, with your ridiculous and puritanical views on sex and nudity that cause more harm to our youth than a brief flash of a woman's bare breast ever will.

Where I live women are allowed to go topless in public. Would you like them to walk around shouting a disclaimer just incase one of your children catches a glimpse?

Yes, I'd love for that to happen. Consequently, she would be slapped with indecent exposure so quickly that you'd be a chimp not to realize the hilarity of your statement. Try this WHERE I LIVE, I'd love it. Hell, we may even get the cops to charge her with corruption of a minor depending on the severity of the incident, they'd love to hear her excuses before cuffing and stuffing her in the paddywagon.

EDIT: You must live in France or Ke-BEC, or a nudist colony. Please enlighten us as to your location.

I live in Ontario, dipsh!t.

After reading several of your posts I am now completely convinced you are the biggest idiot on this forum. I am shocked that people like you actually exist today.

Whoohooo I love the negative energy <Andy Kaufman>. I love inciting you, Brigden. Know why? Because you get soo angry and riled up, and emotional.

Ontario, ahahhaha. That explains it all. Don't ever come to the US. Why are you watching the Super Bowl? What, CFL not exciting enough for ya? Also, I'd highly recommend you watching the South Park movie at least 3 times, it was made for a-holes like you from up North.

 

[Thraxen]

Okay, let me ask you this. Would you have a problem if they both ripped off their clothes and started humping wildly on stage?

First, this has already been discussed in this thread. Second, you can take point to the extreme. No one is saying that any amount of sexuality is OK for general viewing... we are discussing this incident and why should a bare breast be considered so bad.