Mike Stock - 'Children being sexualised by pop music porn'

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


Drummer, do you even have children?
I am not being snarky just wondering.

Originally posted by Justaposter
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

Drummer, do you even have children?
I am not being snarky just wondering.

No.

Not that I know of...

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

Who decides what society should find objectionable?

Ahh...now you're getting somewhere. Who decides, indeed?

Not long ago, the TV guide channel, found on basic cable, included porn movies in their listings - even for customers who didn't subscribe to any adult channels.

Imagine the discomfort as a parent, sitting around with my kids trying to find something to watch and that crap pops up. Sexual intimacy is a private thing, and they sell it on TV like it was a pair of sneakers.

The media is deciding what it 'acceptable' by selling sex by the truckload... and people like you think it's just fine and dandy because what should be objectionable has become the norm because we are told that it IS normal.

What standards are you using?

My own standards of course - same thing you're doing.
Look around... this is a discussion board. It's all opinion.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
These types of music videos should be MA rated and not put on TV before 10.30pm at night at least.

Soooo, you then run to the government broadcast censor panels & lobby them to force your own morals on everyone else...

...Instead of doing the simplest thing possible: Either you take responsibility for what your kids watch or simply turning the damn thing off, you help government to grow into the unwieldy, economy-draining, law-breaking, liberty-smashing behemoth it is today.

The attitude you displayed is exactly the reason America is in the shape it's in...

Originally posted by DeReK DaRkLy

Ahh...now you're getting somewhere. Who decides, indeed?

Not long ago, the TV guide channel, found on basic cable, included porn movies in their listings - even for customers who didn't subscribe to any adult channels.

Imagine the discomfort as a parent, sitting around with my kids trying to find something to watch and that crap pops up. Sexual intimacy is a private thing, and they sell it on TV like it was a pair of sneakers.

The media is deciding what it 'acceptable' by selling sex by the truckload... and people like you think it's just fine and dandy because what should be objectionable has become the norm because we are told that it IS normal.

So about these porn movies: are you talking about full advertisements with footage or are you talking about movie titles showing up in the guide?

Where ever did I say any of this was "fine and dandy"? All I've stated is that children are not going to be damaged or corrupted by it.

What standards are you using?

My own standards of course - same thing you're doing.
Look around... this is a discussion board. It's all opinion.

We're talking about how we should determine what society deems objectionable, not what you find objectionable. Are you saying that you alone should determine what is objectionable to society?

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

Are you saying that you alone should determine what is objectionable to society?

What I'm saying is that society is screwed beyond repair.

The lines between right and wrong, childhood and adulthood, and the definition of innocence is being blurred more and more every day.

I believe there is a conscious effort to destroy our moral and intellectual stability so that average citizens cannot think straight for themselves or make sound judgements.

They are selling sex to kids, and not even hiding it much anymore.

This will be my last response in this thread, as I feel this discussion is about to get very repetitive.

Originally posted by DeReK DaRkLy
I believe there is a conscious effort to destroy our moral and intellectual stability so that average citizens cannot think straight for themselves or make sound judgements.

Ahhh jeez. Here it is finally. It's a giant conspiracy to destroy our moral and intellectual stability. I'm glad you're done here actually because it's now gone to sheer absurdity.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Where ever did I say any of this was "fine and dandy"? All I've stated is that children are not going to be damaged or corrupted by it.

This makes about as much sense as saying "children won't be hurt by alcohol", or "a little MJ in 5th grade is quite OK", or "so what if they stole that radio from that car".

Saying that porn (even soft porn) won't have effect on children is far beyond ignorance, as it applies to parenting and/or child development.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

This makes about as much sense as saying "children won't be hurt by alcohol", or "a little MJ in 5th grade is quite OK", or "so what if they stole that radio from that car".

Sorry, but that's an incongruent comparison. Substance abuse and crime is tangible, sexual imagery or fantasy violence from the media is not.

Saying that porn (even soft porn) won't have effect on children is far beyond ignorance, as it applies to parenting and/or child development.

Read again. I did not say it wasn't going to have effect, I said they would not be damaged or corrupted by it.

Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer

Originally posted by bluemirage5
These types of music videos should be MA rated and not put on TV before 10.30pm at night at least.

Soooo, you then run to the government broadcast censor panels & lobby them to force your own morals on everyone else...

Speaking for myself -- you don't know my morals. And they are pretty wild. However, when it comes to kids, it's best to err on the conservative side. They'll enjoy the wild stuff later in life, maybe they'll be better equipped to handle it.

Originally posted by ReturnOfTheOutlaw

Mr Stock said: "These days you can't watch modern stars - like Britney Spears or Lady Gaga - with a two-year-old.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Link

This thread seems to have a bit off track from the actual article. I absolutely agree it's hippocritical for the producer "talking about the over-sexualisation of the medium that he helped perpetuate himself", as jokei stated. Admittingly there's more inappropriate media currently but haven't there always been choices to make? If you don't like what's available for consumption then don't support it.

I guess I'm seeing this differently than others here because I haven't seen this brought up but why should a two year old be watching a modern pop star? There are still choices of what to watch with children, aren't there? Yes, I'll agree that there's a lot of questionable, inappropriate, sexualized media available but who's forcing a parent to watch Britney or Lady Gaga with their 2 year old?

If you're a Britney fan and have a young child you probably shouldn't be watching her with your child because it's inappropriate. If you are watching Britney with your 2 year old you're only conditioning and contributing to them enjoying it later in childhood and what it suggests and represents. Aren't you? Shouldn't you be reading a book to a 2 year old or teaching them some fundamental value or playing a game with them? If there's nothing appropriate for them on TV maybe it shouldn't be watched. If Britney's on too many channels maybe you should consider not having cable or satellite TV. Who's forcing this upon anyone? Society? Of course it is, it's gotta be. It seems like people are blaming available media for personal decisions which seems a little backwards to me. But what do I know as a person who's never raised a child?

Originally posted by Erasurehead
As a parent you have the power and ability to control what your children are exposed to. Keep it out of your home if you are offended.