Non-censorship
-
The same folks that play rock music backwards to hear what Satan has to tell them...:rolleyes: Anger is the most impotent of passions. It effects nothing it goes about, and hurts the one who is possessed by it more than the one against whom it is directed. Carl Sandburg
"Satan commands you to play the record forward" :) -- My name in Katakana is ヨルゲン. My name in German is Jörgen. I blog too now[^]
-
I've seen twats written uncensored on the BBC before at the beginning of a Fawlty Towers episode, but I never thought I'd see the day when they published a news article containing the word fuck uncensored in print. Let alone the phrase "Now fuck off and cover something important you twats!" : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4247237.stm[^] I guess you can't censor the news. :rolleyes:
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flikrEverybody is entitled to my opinion
Idiots have a way of being found out eventually. :laugh: I thought the funny thing was how lacking in writing skills he obviously is. I mean, if you're going to screw up in public, at least do so competantly! :rolleyes: Anna :rose: Riverblade Ltd - Software Consultancy Services Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "Be yourself - not what others think you should be" - Marcia Graesch "Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart" - A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work.
-
From the ruckus it created you would imagine that they both had sex on stage or something :) I think most people simply did not give a damn about the whole incident but the ones that were offended would not shut up and that's why we're still talking about it one year on. "One of the Georges," said Psmith, "I forget which, once said that a certain number of hours' sleep a day--I cannot recall for the moment how many--made a man something, which for the time being has slipped my memory."
I wouldn't want my kids seeing that, and I'm willing to bet there are a lot more people like me. What I find ironic is these TV stations allow skimpier and skimpier clothing daily and yet when a skimpy garment flops it's all of the sudden horrible. Or seeing 95% of a boob or a chick in lingerie is ok, but the nipple is just wrong. Well, if they would've made her ass put some real clothes on to begin with they could've prevented the thing all together. If people want to look at naked people, then at least keep it on the channels that can be easily blocked. That way everyone is happy and not just one side of the fence. And then, parents can let their kids look at all the tits they want. [edit] And yeah, it is scary that I'm starting to think like a parent now. [/edit] Jeremy Falcon
-
David Wulff wrote: the vocal ones with the biggest sticks to shake In their dreams :rolleyes:
Fold With Us! What a sad world it would be if everyone said and did only what was easy - Shog9
K(arl) wrote: In their dreams You're right, we have the biggest dicks -- not sticks. ;P Jeremy Falcon
-
I wouldn't want my kids seeing that, and I'm willing to bet there are a lot more people like me. What I find ironic is these TV stations allow skimpier and skimpier clothing daily and yet when a skimpy garment flops it's all of the sudden horrible. Or seeing 95% of a boob or a chick in lingerie is ok, but the nipple is just wrong. Well, if they would've made her ass put some real clothes on to begin with they could've prevented the thing all together. If people want to look at naked people, then at least keep it on the channels that can be easily blocked. That way everyone is happy and not just one side of the fence. And then, parents can let their kids look at all the tits they want. [edit] And yeah, it is scary that I'm starting to think like a parent now. [/edit] Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote: And yeah, it is scary that I'm starting to think like a parent now I'm impressed, Jeremy, I really am :) And I don't think its right that there should be nudity on prime time tv either. But I just think too much was made of it...as you say there is skimpy clothing and questionable material on many tv shows (especially some of the stupider reality ones) and people ignore that and one thing like this happens and everyone who's someone tries to get in the news by loudly condemning it. I thought that laughable. Simply fine that woman (who was obviously responsible) and move on. "One of the Georges," said Psmith, "I forget which, once said that a certain number of hours' sleep a day--I cannot recall for the moment how many--made a man something, which for the time being has slipped my memory."
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote: And yeah, it is scary that I'm starting to think like a parent now I'm impressed, Jeremy, I really am :) And I don't think its right that there should be nudity on prime time tv either. But I just think too much was made of it...as you say there is skimpy clothing and questionable material on many tv shows (especially some of the stupider reality ones) and people ignore that and one thing like this happens and everyone who's someone tries to get in the news by loudly condemning it. I thought that laughable. Simply fine that woman (who was obviously responsible) and move on. "One of the Georges," said Psmith, "I forget which, once said that a certain number of hours' sleep a day--I cannot recall for the moment how many--made a man something, which for the time being has slipped my memory."
Ramanan Sivan wrote: I'm impressed, Jeremy, I really am Maybe one day I'll even be rational, but that's pushing it. :) Ramanan Sivan wrote: But I just think too much was made of it Agreed. Ramanan Sivan wrote: Simply fine that woman (who was obviously responsible) and move on. Well, I do think if the network didn't allow the skimpy clothing in the first place, it wouldn't have happened. I figure they should both be fined. Jeremy Falcon
-
I wouldn't want my kids seeing that, and I'm willing to bet there are a lot more people like me. What I find ironic is these TV stations allow skimpier and skimpier clothing daily and yet when a skimpy garment flops it's all of the sudden horrible. Or seeing 95% of a boob or a chick in lingerie is ok, but the nipple is just wrong. Well, if they would've made her ass put some real clothes on to begin with they could've prevented the thing all together. If people want to look at naked people, then at least keep it on the channels that can be easily blocked. That way everyone is happy and not just one side of the fence. And then, parents can let their kids look at all the tits they want. [edit] And yeah, it is scary that I'm starting to think like a parent now. [/edit] Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I wouldn't want my kids seeing that, and I'm willing to bet there are a lot more people like me. Apparently it was the most requested replay item on TiVo by a huge margin. i.e. People voted with their remotes; they liked it, wanted it and replayed it to death. "Oh how scandalous that was Mary Jane, we can't have that filth T.V. Now let's see it again..." But yeah, better that shows that may contain objectional content come with a warning. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
-
K(arl) wrote: In their dreams You're right, we have the biggest dicks -- not sticks. ;P Jeremy Falcon
Yes, in your dreams ;-P
Fold With Us! What a sad world it would be if everyone said and did only what was easy - Shog9
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I wouldn't want my kids seeing that, and I'm willing to bet there are a lot more people like me. Apparently it was the most requested replay item on TiVo by a huge margin. i.e. People voted with their remotes; they liked it, wanted it and replayed it to death. "Oh how scandalous that was Mary Jane, we can't have that filth T.V. Now let's see it again..." But yeah, better that shows that may contain objectional content come with a warning. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
That really wasn't that nice a teat, anyway. Why don't those people buy a magazine or something, and leave their "scandal" comments unsaid?:doh: "If it's Snowbird season, why can't we shoot them?" - Overheard in a bar in Bullhead City
-
I wouldn't want my kids seeing that, and I'm willing to bet there are a lot more people like me. What I find ironic is these TV stations allow skimpier and skimpier clothing daily and yet when a skimpy garment flops it's all of the sudden horrible. Or seeing 95% of a boob or a chick in lingerie is ok, but the nipple is just wrong. Well, if they would've made her ass put some real clothes on to begin with they could've prevented the thing all together. If people want to look at naked people, then at least keep it on the channels that can be easily blocked. That way everyone is happy and not just one side of the fence. And then, parents can let their kids look at all the tits they want. [edit] And yeah, it is scary that I'm starting to think like a parent now. [/edit] Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I wouldn't want my kids seeing that, and I'm willing to bet there are a lot more people like me. Seeing what? An exposed breast? Will you allow your kids to be breast fed? What if you have two kids, would you let the older one look on while the other one is breast-fed? Just what is so horrible with seeing a partially exposed breast (her nipple was covered) for one second? Everyone and their mothers has seen breasts. Regards, Alvaro
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I wouldn't want my kids seeing that, and I'm willing to bet there are a lot more people like me. Apparently it was the most requested replay item on TiVo by a huge margin. i.e. People voted with their remotes; they liked it, wanted it and replayed it to death. "Oh how scandalous that was Mary Jane, we can't have that filth T.V. Now let's see it again..." But yeah, better that shows that may contain objectional content come with a warning. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
Paul Watson wrote: Oh how scandalous that was Mary Jane, we can't have that filth T.V. Now let's see it again... I seriously doubt the majority of them would say that to their girlfriends, etc. Some, but not most. Also, I doubt most of them would rewind to show their kids. And, consider the average user base of TiVo -- they probably are desperate guys who spend too much time watching TV (I'm sure to get voted down for that). Jeremy Falcon
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I wouldn't want my kids seeing that, and I'm willing to bet there are a lot more people like me. Seeing what? An exposed breast? Will you allow your kids to be breast fed? What if you have two kids, would you let the older one look on while the other one is breast-fed? Just what is so horrible with seeing a partially exposed breast (her nipple was covered) for one second? Everyone and their mothers has seen breasts. Regards, Alvaro
Alvaro Mendez wrote: Just what is so horrible with seeing a partially exposed breast (her nipple was covered) It had a ring around it; that's not being covered. Also, would you want me to see your wife's or mom's breasts? I mean if it's no big deal I should be able to check them out with no problems, right? Jeremy Falcon
-
Yes, in your dreams ;-P
Fold With Us! What a sad world it would be if everyone said and did only what was easy - Shog9
Then I must be dreaming! :) Jeremy Falcon
-
Paul Watson wrote: Oh how scandalous that was Mary Jane, we can't have that filth T.V. Now let's see it again... I seriously doubt the majority of them would say that to their girlfriends, etc. Some, but not most. Also, I doubt most of them would rewind to show their kids. And, consider the average user base of TiVo -- they probably are desperate guys who spend too much time watching TV (I'm sure to get voted down for that). Jeremy Falcon
Oh right, you mean the same people who tune into the Super Bowl and watch the adverts with an annoying break for football. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
-
Alvaro Mendez wrote: Just what is so horrible with seeing a partially exposed breast (her nipple was covered) It had a ring around it; that's not being covered. Also, would you want me to see your wife's or mom's breasts? I mean if it's no big deal I should be able to check them out with no problems, right? Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Also, would you want me to see your wife's or mom's breasts? I mean if it's no big deal I should be able to check them out with no problems, right? How absurd. It's not about forcing women to expose their breasts. It's about whether it's OK for children to be exposed to breasts. Children are born exposed to breasts but somehow when one pops out on TV for a second, it's horribly wrong. Alvaro
-
Oh right, you mean the same people who tune into the Super Bowl and watch the adverts with an annoying break for football. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
Actually, I do know some people that do that. Jeremy Falcon
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Also, would you want me to see your wife's or mom's breasts? I mean if it's no big deal I should be able to check them out with no problems, right? How absurd. It's not about forcing women to expose their breasts. It's about whether it's OK for children to be exposed to breasts. Children are born exposed to breasts but somehow when one pops out on TV for a second, it's horribly wrong. Alvaro
Alvaro Mendez wrote: How absurd. It's not about forcing women to expose their breasts. Who said anything about forcing them? Alvaro Mendez wrote: Children are born exposed to breasts but somehow when one pops out on TV for a second, it's horribly wrong. Fine, would you want my 12 year old son seeing your wife's breasts? Or, would you want the world seeing your wife's breasts on TV? I mean, they are just breasts right? We see them all the time. No big deal. BTW, you didn't answer the question. Jeremy Falcon
-
Alvaro Mendez wrote: How absurd. It's not about forcing women to expose their breasts. Who said anything about forcing them? Alvaro Mendez wrote: Children are born exposed to breasts but somehow when one pops out on TV for a second, it's horribly wrong. Fine, would you want my 12 year old son seeing your wife's breasts? Or, would you want the world seeing your wife's breasts on TV? I mean, they are just breasts right? We see them all the time. No big deal. BTW, you didn't answer the question. Jeremy Falcon
God, it seems like you take the "duh, I'm an idiot" position just to prove that you are even more stupid than we thought before. So you don't seem to get it so I'll try to help. THIS ISN'T ABOUT FORCING WOMEN TO SHOW THEIR BREASTS. Yes, the caps is necessary. J.F.C. already! When you say: "Also, would you want me to see your wife's or mom's breasts? I mean if it's no big deal I should be able to check them out with no problems, right?" You are implying that you (the viewer) should dictate that you get to see somebody's breasts without their consent (or their accident). This is FORCING. Could it be any more obvious? I seriously doubt it. What he's saying is, is it a big deal for somebody (the *VIEWER*) to see someone else's breast? Will it traumatize them? Who knows. I seriously doubt it, since we have ALL SEEN BREASTS BEFORE. And even if we haven't (or you haven't), we know for damn sure that nature intended us to see them. I seriously doubt most of your brain even fucking functions (and since you "seriously doubting" something means it's true, it means when I say it it's true as well). I still haven't found what I'm lookin' for - U2
-
Then I must be dreaming! :) Jeremy Falcon
:-D:-D
Fold With Us! What a sad world it would be if everyone said and did only what was easy - Shog9
-
God, it seems like you take the "duh, I'm an idiot" position just to prove that you are even more stupid than we thought before. So you don't seem to get it so I'll try to help. THIS ISN'T ABOUT FORCING WOMEN TO SHOW THEIR BREASTS. Yes, the caps is necessary. J.F.C. already! When you say: "Also, would you want me to see your wife's or mom's breasts? I mean if it's no big deal I should be able to check them out with no problems, right?" You are implying that you (the viewer) should dictate that you get to see somebody's breasts without their consent (or their accident). This is FORCING. Could it be any more obvious? I seriously doubt it. What he's saying is, is it a big deal for somebody (the *VIEWER*) to see someone else's breast? Will it traumatize them? Who knows. I seriously doubt it, since we have ALL SEEN BREASTS BEFORE. And even if we haven't (or you haven't), we know for damn sure that nature intended us to see them. I seriously doubt most of your brain even fucking functions (and since you "seriously doubting" something means it's true, it means when I say it it's true as well). I still haven't found what I'm lookin' for - U2
I`m SO there wrote: God, it seems like you take the "duh, I'm an idiot" position just to prove that you are even more stupid than we thought before. You still butt hurt about the last thread or something? LOL You need to get back on the medication dude. I`m SO there wrote: So you don't seem to get it so I'll try to help. THIS ISN'T ABOUT FORCING WOMEN TO SHOW THEIR BREASTS. Yes, the caps is necessary. J.F.C. already! When you say: You're nuts. I never said anything about force. Now, do you have some cobwebs you need to clean out of your closet about forcing women or something? If not, then quit talking about force for crying out loud. I`m SO there wrote: "Also, would you want me to see your wife's or mom's breasts? I mean if it's no big deal I should be able to check them out with no problems, right?" You are implying that you (the viewer) should dictate that you get to see somebody's breasts without their consent (or their accident). This is FORCING. Could it be any more obvious? I seriously doubt it. Yeah, this proves you're nuts. So, if I say, "I should be able to check out that chick's new hairdo." That means I have to force her to show me what it looks like all fixed up? Not! Let me clue you in on the implied part of that statement. The "should be" part stems from me saying that he said it was no big deal to see breasts, breasts, breasts. Giving that, then I should be able to... Did you catch that, or was I going too quickly for you? I`m SO there wrote: What he's saying is, is it a big deal for somebody (the *VIEWER*) to see someone else's breast? Will it traumatize them? Who knows. I seriously doubt it, since we have ALL SEEN BREASTS BEFORE. And even if we haven't (or you haven't), we know for damn sure that nature intended us to see them. Well, if breasts are no big deal, then why doesn't he want his wife's on TV? That's my whole point. BTW, why don't you let him speak for himself anyway? I`m SO there wrote: I seriously doubt most of your brain even f***ing functions (and since you "seriously doubting" something means it's true, it means when I say it it's true as well). Your logic is about as malformed as NSync. Jeremy Falcon
