It used to be that sex with a 12 year old girl was all I could think about.
I was 11 at the time.
of course.. if you listen to "Don't stand so close to me" there's the verse that goes
"Loose talk in the classroom To hurt they try and try
Strong words in the staffroom The accusations fly
Its no use, he sees her He starts to shake and cough
Just like the old man in That book by Nabokov"
Which references the "Book by Nabokov" as a reference to the unwanted attentions of the young girl and the teacher (Often assumed to be Sting himself.. but denied by him.. but obviously written from his experience a teacher"
I wonder how would the press react to a Woolworth's employment test that asked questions "What is Nabakov famous for?", "Who was the Marquis de Sade", "what is the Kama Sutra?" etc and gave those that passed a job in Woolworths kids?
Last edited by Barry Shnikov; 5th-February-2008 at 08:52 PM.
When all is said and done, it's not really - earth shattering, is it?
If some kids are going to sleep in a Lolita brand bed - what do you have to do, get down on your knees and look for the little aluminium plate fastened to the inside of one of the legs?
Think anyone saw the Woollies website advertising Lolita beds and thought - right, I'll go out and shag an underage girl?
It's just a bit careless, that's all.
In some ways, another symptom of OMIGOD THERE'S A PAEDOPHILE PERVERT ON EVERY STREET CORNER syndrome.
Hey you looked that up... but I'm not petty.. I'll let you keep your
but just finish with the fact that I happened to know Jane Fonda was in her early 30's when Barbarella was released.. as when I saw it for the first time I remember using the school library to work out her age. (This was pre internet and therefore pre IMDB) I think the librarian told me when Barbarella was released and I found some biography of Ms Fonda in some encyclopaedia .. so to you with spots on..
AY THANG YOW !!
One of the cornerstones of paedophilia-justification is the argument that young girls like sex, that they want it, and that it's a perfectly normal activity.
This view is not at all damaged by WH Smiths selling Playboy-branded stationery aimed at kids, by downloadable ringtones (aimed at kids) which say "Instant slut - just add alcohol", by cartoons like Bratz, and so on - it's all aimed at making childhood sexualised. Which adds weight to the justifications of paedophile-apologists.
So, does this one thing "matter"? No, not really, it's just a bed when all's said and done.
Does our society's sexualisation of childhood matter? Yes, very much so.
I agree that you can get too hysterical about this sort of thing.
But the original point of the thread was to point out how incredibly dumb Woolworths staff appeared to be - the actual topic was of secondary importance.
All true, and agreed. Calling a bed range Lolita - especially one made in a spanish-speaking country, e.g. - is not really in that league.
Also true, and agreed. But when did threads on this forum end up discussing the same thing as in the first post?But the original point of the thread was to point out how incredibly dumb Woolworths staff appeared to be - the actual topic was of secondary importance.
Spanish-speaking? Ostley? Huh, I knew they had their own language up in Yorkshire, but I didn't realise it was Spanish
Well yeah.
Actually, I don't believe this "No-one here knew who Lolita was" excuse, it's so patently unbelievable. I'm sure the PR person was genuinely that clueless - I'm quite happy to believe most PR people are very dumb. But I reckon most other people at Woolworths spotted it, but just kept their head down, and didn't mention it.
Alternatively, it was some "clever" idea to provide hip and trendy names, which Woolworths marketing department decided was a good idea.
Either way, the marketing guys at Woollies fully live down to my expectations of marketing staff everywhere.
Bratz outfits include leather miniskirts, thigh-high boots, fishnet stockings, thongs, and bikinis. Bratz slogans are things like "They know how to flaunt it". And they're aimed at 4-year-olds.
In fact, I reckon Playboy-branded stuff is far less damaging than things like Bratz.
Now, OK, I know you can get all over-reactive about this sort of thing, but there's a legitimate concern about the sort of marketing and images young girls are exposed to, and the damage this does - have a look here:
BBC NEWS | Health | Sexualisation 'harms' young girls
and here:
Executive Summary
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks