2½ Men .. a Poll
-
What would be the shocking part? "'My wife a lesbian" or "She's never enjoyed oral sex"? Question to the offended ones : would it be shocking if the line would have been "My wife a serial-killer? How can that be? She's never enjoyed to remove the tripe when cooking?" (yeah, I know, it's much less funny)
New, what do you own the world? How do you own disorder?
KaЯl wrote: What would be the shocking part? It's a cultural difference, Karl. You know how the France version of "Sesame Street" features hookers on each corner, and the title of "Mister Rogers Neighborhood" doesn't contain a surname? Well, things are a bit different over here... Ya see, this is a young country, and although most of the population lives in urban or suburban settings, most of us are only a few generations removed from agrarian roots. This affects certain things - school schedules, for instance. We haven't quite come around to the idea that the purpose of school is to keep children away from their homes so the parents don't need to be bothered. So parents need to find other ways to keep their children out of their hair. Such as television, and video games. The other difference has to do with odd notions of morality. Adults - defined as "people not under the age of consent" (oh, age of consent... yeah, we've got that ol' ball-n'-chain too) - are free to engage in whatever sick and perverted behaviors they feel like, provided they keep it out of the streets (makes the roads slick, ya know?). But we've this ridiculous double standard, whereby neo-pubescent orgies are frowned upon. I know, i know... your jaw is dropping in astonishment. But we all have our little idiosyncrasies... Anyway, the combination of those two bits of barbarism results in a thin attitude of shock at any suggestion of eroticism aired during hours where the TV might be babysitting (aprox. 5AM - 3AM). Please, suppress the natural reaction of shock and horror descriptions of such a primitive culture must inspire in you. Keep an open mind...
Shog9 --
Exchanging a walk-on part in the War
for the lead role in a Cage
-
What would be the shocking part? "'My wife a lesbian" or "She's never enjoyed oral sex"? Question to the offended ones : would it be shocking if the line would have been "My wife a serial-killer? How can that be? She's never enjoyed to remove the tripe when cooking?" (yeah, I know, it's much less funny)
New, what do you own the world? How do you own disorder?
I was neither offended or shocked. Reread and you'll see I said it was a funny line. What surprised me was that it was on a TV show/channel that 'normally' does not offer up that kind of stuff. To use another analogy, how about next summer, when Dundas does another summer special on their chart software, instead of bikini clad babes, they use topless ones. That will raise quite a bit of discussion, simply because of expectations. N'est pas! ;) Chris Meech If you spin a Chinese person around, do they become dis-oriented? Why do people in this time period worry so much about time traveler's destroying their worldline when they have no problem doing it themselves every day? John Titor.
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: tacit, societal approval of something that should be under the control of parents to approve or disapprove It still is. If the parents don't like their kids watching it, they don't have to own a TV. Or order that channel. Or they can find another place for their kids to go after school. And on, and on, and on. Parents should stop expecting society to raise their children for them; or at the very least stop complaining when [they absolve their responsibility and] said society turns their children into unthinking culture whores. Eco [Edited]
Eco Jones wrote: It still is. Not when they're force fed "your" view unexpectedly. That is the purpose of movie ratings, for example. HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, etc - you expect to find this sort of fare and it is relatively easy for a parent to control. But a comedic sitcom on ABC, CBSS or NBC at an hour when children would be watching is althogether different. Eco Jones wrote: Parents should stop expecting society to raise their children for them No one said or implied they did, but again, if they are bombarded with slime via sitcoms then society is in fact teaching them morals, at a minimum. Mike
-
KaЯl wrote: What would be the shocking part? It's a cultural difference, Karl. You know how the France version of "Sesame Street" features hookers on each corner, and the title of "Mister Rogers Neighborhood" doesn't contain a surname? Well, things are a bit different over here... Ya see, this is a young country, and although most of the population lives in urban or suburban settings, most of us are only a few generations removed from agrarian roots. This affects certain things - school schedules, for instance. We haven't quite come around to the idea that the purpose of school is to keep children away from their homes so the parents don't need to be bothered. So parents need to find other ways to keep their children out of their hair. Such as television, and video games. The other difference has to do with odd notions of morality. Adults - defined as "people not under the age of consent" (oh, age of consent... yeah, we've got that ol' ball-n'-chain too) - are free to engage in whatever sick and perverted behaviors they feel like, provided they keep it out of the streets (makes the roads slick, ya know?). But we've this ridiculous double standard, whereby neo-pubescent orgies are frowned upon. I know, i know... your jaw is dropping in astonishment. But we all have our little idiosyncrasies... Anyway, the combination of those two bits of barbarism results in a thin attitude of shock at any suggestion of eroticism aired during hours where the TV might be babysitting (aprox. 5AM - 3AM). Please, suppress the natural reaction of shock and horror descriptions of such a primitive culture must inspire in you. Keep an open mind...
Shog9 --
Exchanging a walk-on part in the War
for the lead role in a Cage
-
KaЯl wrote: What would be the shocking part? It's a cultural difference, Karl. You know how the France version of "Sesame Street" features hookers on each corner, and the title of "Mister Rogers Neighborhood" doesn't contain a surname? Well, things are a bit different over here... Ya see, this is a young country, and although most of the population lives in urban or suburban settings, most of us are only a few generations removed from agrarian roots. This affects certain things - school schedules, for instance. We haven't quite come around to the idea that the purpose of school is to keep children away from their homes so the parents don't need to be bothered. So parents need to find other ways to keep their children out of their hair. Such as television, and video games. The other difference has to do with odd notions of morality. Adults - defined as "people not under the age of consent" (oh, age of consent... yeah, we've got that ol' ball-n'-chain too) - are free to engage in whatever sick and perverted behaviors they feel like, provided they keep it out of the streets (makes the roads slick, ya know?). But we've this ridiculous double standard, whereby neo-pubescent orgies are frowned upon. I know, i know... your jaw is dropping in astonishment. But we all have our little idiosyncrasies... Anyway, the combination of those two bits of barbarism results in a thin attitude of shock at any suggestion of eroticism aired during hours where the TV might be babysitting (aprox. 5AM - 3AM). Please, suppress the natural reaction of shock and horror descriptions of such a primitive culture must inspire in you. Keep an open mind...
Shog9 --
Exchanging a walk-on part in the War
for the lead role in a Cage
ROTFLMAO. You should be writing speeches for somebody. Chris Meech If you spin a Chinese person around, do they become dis-oriented? Why do people in this time period worry so much about time traveler's destroying their worldline when they have no problem doing it themselves every day? John Titor.
-
Eco Jones wrote: It still is. Not when they're force fed "your" view unexpectedly. That is the purpose of movie ratings, for example. HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, etc - you expect to find this sort of fare and it is relatively easy for a parent to control. But a comedic sitcom on ABC, CBSS or NBC at an hour when children would be watching is althogether different. Eco Jones wrote: Parents should stop expecting society to raise their children for them No one said or implied they did, but again, if they are bombarded with slime via sitcoms then society is in fact teaching them morals, at a minimum. Mike
Mike Gaskey wrote: Not when they're force fed "your" view unexpectedly. That is the purpose of movie ratings, for example. Bullshit. If a parent is really concerned about what their child is watching, then they should screen the show before letting their kids see it. That's what a VCR is for. Or a PVR. Movie ratings and TV ratings are just another way of letting society dictate what is or is not appropriate for children at what age and these systems are therefore not to be implicitly trusted. Eco
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: Not when they're force fed "your" view unexpectedly. That is the purpose of movie ratings, for example. Bullshit. If a parent is really concerned about what their child is watching, then they should screen the show before letting their kids see it. That's what a VCR is for. Or a PVR. Movie ratings and TV ratings are just another way of letting society dictate what is or is not appropriate for children at what age and these systems are therefore not to be implicitly trusted. Eco
Eco Jones wrote: That's what a VCR is for You betcha - everyone should run out, buy a crate of tapes, tape the network shows, review them, then let their kids watch the ones that match their version of morality. Eco Jones wrote: Or a PVR. And this would be so much easier since we all have one, the savings on blank tapes alone would make reviewing a joy. Eco Jones wrote: Movie ratings and TV ratings are just another way of letting society dictate No they're not. This gives parents a summarized view so they can decide, not society, the parent. I assume your opinions would stay the same if you walked outside and found your daughter pulling a train, after all, she might have seen it in TV. Mike
-
Actually, I thought your line was more funny. Joe Woodbury When all else fails, there's always delusion. - Conan O'Brien
-
KaЯl wrote: Question to the offended ones : would it be shocking if the line would have been "My wife a serial-killer? For my money this is the sort of thought process that will eventually take Western society down the tubes. To distract from the subject at hand, which you know to be both the exposure of children to homosexuality (a perversion regardless of politically correct opinion) or to oral sex when they're at an age where a kiss on the lips (those under your nose) should be tittilating enough, to say, "well it isn't as bad as a serial killer" is a step down the path to the eventual point where there is no such thing as morality. Furthermore, to see it on TV at a time when children are sure to be watching is to give tacit, societal approval of something that should be under the control of parents to approve or disapprove, not a TV station, not a producer, not a director, not a government, not a neighbor. To put it more succinctly, it is the parents job to teach morals. That includes attitudes regarding sex, the taking of lives, telling the truth - not the media's. Mike
It's must be a cultural thing. Here it's hard to see a TV ad without boobs exposure, even to sell yoghourts (I'm exagerating a little bit[^], as always, but not so much). Mike Gaskey wrote: to say, "well it isn't as bad as a serial killer" is a step down the path to the eventual point where there is no such thing as morality. My point was we are much more tolerant to violence than to sex. But again it's cultural, I'm not sure it's the same around the World.
New, what do you own the world? How do you own disorder?
-
Eco Jones wrote: That's what a VCR is for You betcha - everyone should run out, buy a crate of tapes, tape the network shows, review them, then let their kids watch the ones that match their version of morality. Eco Jones wrote: Or a PVR. And this would be so much easier since we all have one, the savings on blank tapes alone would make reviewing a joy. Eco Jones wrote: Movie ratings and TV ratings are just another way of letting society dictate No they're not. This gives parents a summarized view so they can decide, not society, the parent. I assume your opinions would stay the same if you walked outside and found your daughter pulling a train, after all, she might have seen it in TV. Mike
Mike Gaskey wrote: You betcha - everyone should run out, buy a crate of tapes, tape the network shows, review them, then let their kids watch the ones that match their version of morality. Okay, mind being consistent? First you say that your kids shouldn't be exposed to things that are morally reprehensible; now you're implying that preventing that is bad. Which is it, Mike? No money for a VCR or a PVR? No time to screen? Sell the TV. Get a library card. Or quit whining that what the networks think is appropriate, you don't. It's not their problem. It's yours. You don't have to let your kid be pop culture's bitch. Mike Gaskey wrote: I assume your opinions would stay the same if you walked outside and found your daughter pulling a train, after all, she might have seen it in TV. I have no idea what point you're trying to make here. Would you rephrase it? Eco
-
ROTFLMAO. You should be writing speeches for somebody. Chris Meech If you spin a Chinese person around, do they become dis-oriented? Why do people in this time period worry so much about time traveler's destroying their worldline when they have no problem doing it themselves every day? John Titor.
-
KaЯl wrote: What would be the shocking part? It's a cultural difference, Karl. You know how the France version of "Sesame Street" features hookers on each corner, and the title of "Mister Rogers Neighborhood" doesn't contain a surname? Well, things are a bit different over here... Ya see, this is a young country, and although most of the population lives in urban or suburban settings, most of us are only a few generations removed from agrarian roots. This affects certain things - school schedules, for instance. We haven't quite come around to the idea that the purpose of school is to keep children away from their homes so the parents don't need to be bothered. So parents need to find other ways to keep their children out of their hair. Such as television, and video games. The other difference has to do with odd notions of morality. Adults - defined as "people not under the age of consent" (oh, age of consent... yeah, we've got that ol' ball-n'-chain too) - are free to engage in whatever sick and perverted behaviors they feel like, provided they keep it out of the streets (makes the roads slick, ya know?). But we've this ridiculous double standard, whereby neo-pubescent orgies are frowned upon. I know, i know... your jaw is dropping in astonishment. But we all have our little idiosyncrasies... Anyway, the combination of those two bits of barbarism results in a thin attitude of shock at any suggestion of eroticism aired during hours where the TV might be babysitting (aprox. 5AM - 3AM). Please, suppress the natural reaction of shock and horror descriptions of such a primitive culture must inspire in you. Keep an open mind...
Shog9 --
Exchanging a walk-on part in the War
for the lead role in a Cage
One day, you should make a compilation of your best posts, I'm sure it could be a best-seller :) Shog9 wrote: most of us are only a few generations removed from agrarian roots It's the same here. I don't have to go through many generations to find ground stuck to the soles(2 exactly). But precisely, I thought that people from the country were much more used to sexual actions, because it happens everywhere around them! Mother Nature is not prudish. Shog9 wrote: Keep an open mind I'll try.
New, what do you own the world? How do you own disorder?
-
I was neither offended or shocked. Reread and you'll see I said it was a funny line. What surprised me was that it was on a TV show/channel that 'normally' does not offer up that kind of stuff. To use another analogy, how about next summer, when Dundas does another summer special on their chart software, instead of bikini clad babes, they use topless ones. That will raise quite a bit of discussion, simply because of expectations. N'est pas! ;) Chris Meech If you spin a Chinese person around, do they become dis-oriented? Why do people in this time period worry so much about time traveler's destroying their worldline when they have no problem doing it themselves every day? John Titor.
Chris Meech wrote: instead of bikini clad babes, they use topless ones Ah, yes! :-D However, to avoid accusations of sexual discrimination and to satisfy our feminine audience, I suggest they add some chippendales too.
New, what do you own the world? How do you own disorder?
-
KaЯl wrote: What would be the shocking part? It's a cultural difference, Karl. You know how the France version of "Sesame Street" features hookers on each corner, and the title of "Mister Rogers Neighborhood" doesn't contain a surname? Well, things are a bit different over here... Ya see, this is a young country, and although most of the population lives in urban or suburban settings, most of us are only a few generations removed from agrarian roots. This affects certain things - school schedules, for instance. We haven't quite come around to the idea that the purpose of school is to keep children away from their homes so the parents don't need to be bothered. So parents need to find other ways to keep their children out of their hair. Such as television, and video games. The other difference has to do with odd notions of morality. Adults - defined as "people not under the age of consent" (oh, age of consent... yeah, we've got that ol' ball-n'-chain too) - are free to engage in whatever sick and perverted behaviors they feel like, provided they keep it out of the streets (makes the roads slick, ya know?). But we've this ridiculous double standard, whereby neo-pubescent orgies are frowned upon. I know, i know... your jaw is dropping in astonishment. But we all have our little idiosyncrasies... Anyway, the combination of those two bits of barbarism results in a thin attitude of shock at any suggestion of eroticism aired during hours where the TV might be babysitting (aprox. 5AM - 3AM). Please, suppress the natural reaction of shock and horror descriptions of such a primitive culture must inspire in you. Keep an open mind...
Shog9 --
Exchanging a walk-on part in the War
for the lead role in a Cage
:omg: My Quote Selected Text button is gone! Damn school computers... :mad: Oh well, good thing I can do it by hand ;) Shog9 wrote: Adults - defined as "people under the age of consent" I think you may have meant "over" the age of consent... :) Josh...have they had your straight-jacket fitted yet? :rolleyes:
When I can talk about 64 bit processors and attract girls with my computer not my car, I'll come out of the closet. Until that time...I'm like "What's the ENTER key?" -Hockey on being a geek
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: You betcha - everyone should run out, buy a crate of tapes, tape the network shows, review them, then let their kids watch the ones that match their version of morality. Okay, mind being consistent? First you say that your kids shouldn't be exposed to things that are morally reprehensible; now you're implying that preventing that is bad. Which is it, Mike? No money for a VCR or a PVR? No time to screen? Sell the TV. Get a library card. Or quit whining that what the networks think is appropriate, you don't. It's not their problem. It's yours. You don't have to let your kid be pop culture's bitch. Mike Gaskey wrote: I assume your opinions would stay the same if you walked outside and found your daughter pulling a train, after all, she might have seen it in TV. I have no idea what point you're trying to make here. Would you rephrase it? Eco
Eco Jones wrote: Which is it Sarcasm. Eco Jones wrote: pulling a train Giving a BJ to a line of guys, one after the other. The oral equivalent of a gang bang. And yes it was on network TV. Eco Jones wrote: You don't have to let your kid be pop culture's bitch No one said you did. But if TV continues with the current direction, within 50 years it will be airing man-animal group sex. Think not? A relatively few years ago, Ellen DeG lost a show after outing herself and incorporating that outing into her show. Today you can find show after show after show where homosexuality is the theme. Farther back, say 20 years or so it was frowned on to show a man and woman in bed. Today there's little that is frowned on and if you'll pay attention to the "reality" shows fairly soon it'll be, "Welcome to the who has the moistest whatever show". The point being, each and every season the networks take it farther and farther. The large majority of parents don't care, using the toob as a baby sitter. Those that do, regardless of your statements, have little ability to control what thir kids see and hear because of the pervasiveness of sex, sexual innuendo and gratuitious violence that is shown for shock value in shows that you'd never expect - as with the one that started this thread. Should anyone care? I for one have no minor children, so to a certain extent I don't. I worry for my grand children and later and the amoral world they'll inherit. Mike
-
:omg: My Quote Selected Text button is gone! Damn school computers... :mad: Oh well, good thing I can do it by hand ;) Shog9 wrote: Adults - defined as "people under the age of consent" I think you may have meant "over" the age of consent... :) Josh...have they had your straight-jacket fitted yet? :rolleyes:
When I can talk about 64 bit processors and attract girls with my computer not my car, I'll come out of the closet. Until that time...I'm like "What's the ENTER key?" -Hockey on being a geek
David Stone wrote: Shog9 wrote: Adults - defined as "people under the age of consent" Shame on you, changing what i wrote. You should use the quote button, then you wouldn't embarrass yourself by making fun of me for mistakes i didn't make... ;P
Shog9 --
Exchanging a walk-on part in the War
for the lead role in a Cage
-
David Stone wrote: Shog9 wrote: Adults - defined as "people under the age of consent" Shame on you, changing what i wrote. You should use the quote button, then you wouldn't embarrass yourself by making fun of me for mistakes i didn't make... ;P
Shog9 --
Exchanging a walk-on part in the War
for the lead role in a Cage
Okay this is wierd...the Quote thingie is there when I try to respond to posts in the Lounge...but not here in the Soapbox... :~ And why on earth would I ever make fun of your mistakes? ;P
When I can talk about 64 bit processors and attract girls with my computer not my car, I'll come out of the closet. Until that time...I'm like "What's the ENTER key?" -Hockey on being a geek
-
Okay this is wierd...the Quote thingie is there when I try to respond to posts in the Lounge...but not here in the Soapbox... :~ And why on earth would I ever make fun of your mistakes? ;P
When I can talk about 64 bit processors and attract girls with my computer not my car, I'll come out of the closet. Until that time...I'm like "What's the ENTER key?" -Hockey on being a geek
-
It's must be a cultural thing. Here it's hard to see a TV ad without boobs exposure, even to sell yoghourts (I'm exagerating a little bit[^], as always, but not so much). Mike Gaskey wrote: to say, "well it isn't as bad as a serial killer" is a step down the path to the eventual point where there is no such thing as morality. My point was we are much more tolerant to violence than to sex. But again it's cultural, I'm not sure it's the same around the World.
New, what do you own the world? How do you own disorder?
KaЯl wrote: It's must be a cultural thing. More a function of the age of a culture versus the culture itself, in the case of what I would call Western Civilization anyway. By the way, I have become numb to violence because it is so prevalent in the media. In a Sly Stallone flick or something more current, you'll see people shot up / hundreds killed, etc -- all to take your attention away from the fact that there is no plot. I frankly think that is dangerous because there are kids today who are growing up with absolutely no sense of right versus wrong. This is primarily due to a drug subculture in the inner cities and to some extent in rural areas. Exposure to mindless violence in entertainment legitimizes things that would not otherwise be so. The same goes for sex. I have an 18, nearly 19 year old step son. I consider him to be past the point where his viewing should be monitored. The wall in his bedroom is full of posters, either females or automobiles. On one of his wall hangings is a reclining nude that I've had for years, but stored until he hit an age where I thought it okay to let him have (I searched for years to find this and hated not having it up). So it isn't a matter of being prudish, my llife has been anything but. However,I am honestly frightened by the amount of sexual content potentially being viewed by small children. The result is the same numbing of the senses and respect for life that I think has been accomplished via violence. Once you're numb to it all, rape becomes something that was asked for and the life you just took, no big deal. Mike
-
Eco Jones wrote: Which is it Sarcasm. Eco Jones wrote: pulling a train Giving a BJ to a line of guys, one after the other. The oral equivalent of a gang bang. And yes it was on network TV. Eco Jones wrote: You don't have to let your kid be pop culture's bitch No one said you did. But if TV continues with the current direction, within 50 years it will be airing man-animal group sex. Think not? A relatively few years ago, Ellen DeG lost a show after outing herself and incorporating that outing into her show. Today you can find show after show after show where homosexuality is the theme. Farther back, say 20 years or so it was frowned on to show a man and woman in bed. Today there's little that is frowned on and if you'll pay attention to the "reality" shows fairly soon it'll be, "Welcome to the who has the moistest whatever show". The point being, each and every season the networks take it farther and farther. The large majority of parents don't care, using the toob as a baby sitter. Those that do, regardless of your statements, have little ability to control what thir kids see and hear because of the pervasiveness of sex, sexual innuendo and gratuitious violence that is shown for shock value in shows that you'd never expect - as with the one that started this thread. Should anyone care? I for one have no minor children, so to a certain extent I don't. I worry for my grand children and later and the amoral world they'll inherit. Mike
Mike Gaskey wrote: Sarcasm. Yes, I got the sarcasm. And you were being contradictory. "I care what my kids see on TV, but I'll make fun of you for suggesting taking a real effort to know what my kids see on TV." Mike Gaskey wrote: But if TV continues with the current direction, within 50 years it will be airing man-animal group sex. So what? Nobody's forcing you to watch it. If you don't like it, don't watch it - don't let your kids watch it. If enough people don't like it, they won't air it. After all, TV exists to make money for advertisers and product manufacturers. It is not around for your benefit. It is there to exploit you. Mike Gaskey wrote: amoral world Please. 'Moral' is arbitrary and subjective. If you really don't like the morals that society projects in the media, then I guess you'll make a big effort to decide what in that media should influence your kids. Mike Gaskey wrote: pulling a train Hehehe I've never heard that one before. Eco
