OT (sort of): CBS revisited

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
you'd better be well into the explanations by now
if your son is watching that crap.

That's just it, Peter, he does not watch that crap. He sure likes football
and the Panthers. Next year, I will definately plan some occupying events
for haltime . . . And keep MTV out of my house for a few more years.

No kid would even
care, if it weren't for the fact that their parents are always having a
fit
whenever any skin shows up.

You are exposing your obtuse ignorance again, Pete. Of COURSE kids care
about that crap! Most would stare at naked pictures all day long if they
could. Even at ten years old. They would eat only ice cream, stay up late,
forgo school and live in a fort unless someone who has some semblance of
values tightens their reins and demonstrates boundaries of manners and
taste.

So how many kids do you have, Peter?

--
Jim Fisher

"Jim Fisher" wrote in message
.. .
That's just it, Peter, he does not watch that crap.

I don't get it. If he doesn't watch that crap, how'd he see the breast in
question?

You are exposing your obtuse ignorance again, Pete. Of COURSE kids care
about that crap! Most would stare at naked pictures all day long if they
could. Even at ten years old.

I didn't say they wouldn't. I said it's primarily because of the way their
parents react to even the slightest hint of nudity. If you want to reply to
posts that weren't written, I'll just leave you to that and not even bother
trying to clear things up for you.

So how many kids do you have, Peter?

One. What's that got to do with anything? You don't need to have a child
to understand how the way society in general reacts to, and allows to be
broadcast, any variety of potentially offensive subjects affects how
children (and people in general) react to those potentially offensive
subjects.

There are lots of societies where an exposed breast is no big deal, and
where children aren't shocked by them. The USA just doesn't happen to be
one of them.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
I don't get it. If he doesn't watch that crap, how'd he see the breast in
question?

'Case he was watching the SuperBowl - not MTV or the Victoria's Secret
lingerie show, wingnut! Are you dense or just being silly? I'll explain it
in clearer terms if you really want me to.

And, to be clear, this isn't about an exposed breast. It's about an
attack - right in my living room - on America's version of morality and
witnessed by my little boy.

You are exposing your obtuse ignorance again, Pete. Of COURSE kids care
about that crap!

I didn't say they wouldn't.

Umm, I think your words were "They would not care . . ." but perhaps my
memory is not what it used to be.

I said it's primarily because of the way their
parents react to even the slightest hint of nudity.

No, not the slightest. "Slightest" is perhaps an exposed belly button, a
thong-ish costume on the magician's assistant, an exposed cleavage. This is
typically called "suggestive" in case you are taking notes. That kinda
stuff was unacceptable during my parent's generation but society has evolved
(for good or bad) outside that version of morality.

A boob exposed rather forcefully by another man right on primetime TV is not
a "slight hint" in my Book of Morality.

And the parents present in the room didn't react at all at the time. We
were all too shocked and ****ed off. The halftime show went from bad
(disgracing the US flag) to worse (crotch grabbing) then to shocking
(Janet's goods). It wasn't like we all stood up in unison and spouted Bible
verses. The tiddy was the simply straw on the camel's back. It is only
hindsight that tells me that I should have turned the channel at the
beginning of halftime.

So how many kids do you have, Peter?

One. What's that got to do with anything?

It has absolutely everything to do with it, silly! How old is the kid?
What did he think of the halftime show, Pete? Y'all did watch it, right?

You don't need to have a child to understand
how the way society in general reacts (. . .)

No, of course you don't. But having one sure changes most folks view on
silly things like morality and virtue. You are obviously an exception to
that.

There are lots of societies where an exposed breast is no big deal, and
where children aren't shocked by them. The USA just doesn't happen to be
one of them.

My, that is an absolutely brilliant observation, Peter. The fact that the
United States has a slightly different set of societal rules from other
countries has never occurred to me.

So how would you have felt if ol' Justin and Janet stripped naked and "went
at it" in front of your kid right there on television, Pete? Just curious.

--
Jim Fisher

Jim Fisher wrote:

And the parents present in the room didn't react at all at the time. We
were all too shocked and ****ed off.

Are you kidding? My 17-month old son knows very quickly what I'm feeling.
You think you can sit some older kids in a room with some "shocked and
****ed off" adults and hide the group reaction from the kids? Not
completely impossible, but also not terribly likely.

I didn't see the show myself (football doesn't play well in my home), but
your description is interesting. "Crotch grabbing"? *That* sounds bad.
I've only recently learned to be *very* careful how I hold Alex when he's
in a kicking mood. More lessons in that area he doesn't need.

But that's a "violence" issue; not a "body shame" issue.

Most amazing to me, though, is "disgracing the US flag". I've always
thought that the most jingoistic people were those likely to be avid
watchers of sports. If that's anywhere near the truth, this would be a
particularly stupid show to place before that audience.

I think that marketers have simply lost their minds. In a world of spam,
dinner-time phone solicitation, and pop-under ads, marketers have finally
decided that we're sheep to be shorn, and nothing more.

- Andrew

"Jim Fisher" wrote in message
...
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
I don't get it. If he doesn't watch that crap, how'd he see the breast
in
question?

'Case he was watching the SuperBowl

"That crap" in my post to which you replied referred to the Super Bowl
halftime show. You replied that your son doesn't watch that crap. But
somehow he saw the breast in question. Which means he must have been
watching that crap.

And, to be clear, this isn't about an exposed breast. It's about an
attack - right in my living room - on America's version of morality and
witnessed by my little boy.

There was no attack. 9/11, that's an attack. In any case, the exposed
breast was that least of the entire "attack" you've perceived. If the
exposed breast was an attack, then the entire halftime show is an all-out
war.

You are exposing your obtuse ignorance again, Pete. Of COURSE kids
care
about that crap!

I didn't say they wouldn't.

Umm, I think your words were "They would not care . . ." but perhaps my
memory is not what it used to be.

Note the use of the future perfect tense, to indicate a hypothetical
situation postulated by the following clause beginning with "if". You are
claiming kids will always react in this way, regardless of upbringing, while
my comment was respect to how they would behave given a different
upbringing.

And the parents present in the room didn't react at all at the time. We
were all too shocked and ****ed off. The halftime show went from bad
(disgracing the US flag) to worse (crotch grabbing) then to shocking
(Janet's goods).

And yet, you left it on, and allowed the children to remain in the room and
watch. But you don't get indignant until the breast comes out? Absurd.

In any case, I'm not talking about how you all reacted to this isolated
incident. I'm talking about what you teach your children generally. Years
of attudinal education led up to this and your reaction as well as the kids'
reaction.

It has absolutely everything to do with it, silly! How old is the kid?
What did he think of the halftime show, Pete? Y'all did watch it, right?

No, we don't watch that crap. Please keep up.

No, of course you don't. But having one sure changes most folks view on
silly things like morality and virtue. You are obviously an exception to
that.

If your morality and virtue changed when you had a child, then YOU are the
exception. Most people teach their own children the very same things they
learned. Many people make a show of "cleaning up their act" when they have
kids, but it's just a veneer and their kids still wind up with all the same
character faults that their parents have. They are better at learning than
adults are at hiding.

My, that is an absolutely brilliant observation, Peter. The fact that the
United States has a slightly different set of societal rules from other
countries has never occurred to me.

Well, that explains a lot. Your belief that children simply inherently act
one way or the other, for example, and that how they are raised cannot
affect that. Perhaps you should open your eyes a little more.

So how would you have felt if ol' Justin and Janet stripped naked and
"went
at it" in front of your kid right there on television, Pete? Just
curious.

Aren't you listening? We don't watch that crap.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote
If your morality and virtue changed when you had a child, then YOU are the
exception. Most people teach their own children the very same things they
learned. Many people make a show of "cleaning up their act" when they
have
kids, but it's just a veneer and their kids still wind up with all the
same
character faults that their parents have. They are better at learning
than
adults are at hiding.


I don't think so. I know many parents, myself included, who changed their
lifestyles when faced with the responsibility of parenthood. I suspect my
parents did the same thing. Just my guess, but I bet a lot of people
experience parenthood as a life-altering event.

Michael

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:10:21 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in Message-Id:
:

Note the use of the future perfect tense, to indicate a hypothetical
situation postulated by the following clause beginning with "if".

Was that in the subjunctive mood? :-)

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
You replied that your son doesn't watch that crap. But
somehow he saw the breast in question. Which means he must have been
watching that crap.

Yeah, I didn't think you got it the first and second time. I ain't
explaining it again, Pete. You'll just have to skip that question on the
test.

the exposed
breast was that least of the entire "attack" you've perceived. If the
exposed breast was an attack, then the entire halftime show is an all-out
war.

By golly, I think you might just be getting the point! I sure hope that it
is the beginning of a war. You may not give a damn about the kind of lessons
being taught to your kid but I damn sure do.

Note the use of the future perfect tense, to indicate a hypothetical
situation postulated by the following clause beginning with "if". You are
claiming kids will always react in this way, regardless of upbringing,
while
my comment was respect to how they would behave given a different
upbringing.

shwew Damn! I read that twice and it still went right over my
close-minded little head, Pete! Do you write for the FAA on the side?

And yet, you left it on, and allowed the children to remain in the room
and
watch. But you don't get indignant until the breast comes out? Absurd.

Naw, I'd call it normal. I'm fairly slow to anger and quick with
retribution. By the time Justin violently ripped Janet's clothes off, it
was too late.

In any case, I'm not talking about how you all reacted to this isolated
incident.

You aren't? Okay, no fair. You can't switch gears without telling me.
Hate it when that happens.

If your morality and virtue changed when you had a child, then YOU are the
exception.

Hmm. You have a point. My point, however, was that before I had a kid, the
spectacle of Janet being forcefully declothed on stage would have been
laughed at, applauded and even celebrated or simply dismissed ("It's just a
nip, man!) - much as you are doing now. Having a kid changed (focused?)
that view along with many others.

Something you obviously wouldn't understand.

Well, that explains a lot. Your belief that children simply inherently
act
one way or the other, for example, and that how they are raised cannot
affect that.

What?? Where the hell did that come from! You've lost it, buddy.

So how would you have felt if ol' Justin and Janet stripped naked and
"went
at it" in front of your kid right there on television, Pete? Just
curious.

Aren't you listening? We don't watch that crap.

I see. Avoidance, eh? That's a handy tool in the pattern. Makes you a
coward in a debate, though.

Answer the question.

--
Jim Fisher

"Jim Fisher" wrote in message
...
Aren't you listening? We don't watch that crap.

I see. Avoidance, eh? That's a handy tool in the pattern. Makes you a
coward in a debate, though.

You don't get it. For me, it's a non-issue simply because I would not have
been in that situation. You were foolish enough to let your kids watch all
the crap that preceded the exposed breast, in spite of the fact that every
minute before that was every bit as offensive as the exposed breast.

What difference would it have made if Janet and Justin had been naked? Even
clothed, their behavior was every bit as offensive.

Answer the question.

Your question is stupid. It's like you asked me how would I feel if, while
at a strip club with my son, two of the strippers started performing
cunnilingus on each other.

Pete