Leaving the dancing out, it could have been more age appropriate were they not dressed like saloon prostitutes from the old west days. Try to picture it in cute matching sweat-style dance pants and tee-shirts.Heh, they did look like something out of wild west saloon. And they could have kept their stomach's covered, just because it should have been obvious that a bunch of people would have a problem with it.
The parents ought to be ashamed
Does a seven or eight year old kid even know where babies come from? (I first heard about that process on the playground in 3rd grade but didn't quite believe the story.)You can't be serious. Knowledge about this stuff is obvious not uniform. But at the same time, I don't think prepubescent kids really understand what a really strong sex drive is like.
Fungible, of course the little girls had no idea of the sexual aspect of it, but the parents and choreographers most certainly did.Again, I don't really get that. Nothing in this video seemed "Sexual" to me at all. No more then if robots were doing these dances or something. But at the same time, it was obvious that some people would feel that way and be bothered, so I was cringing a little. But really I don't "get" how this is sexual.
delmoi, what are you on about? Little girls = toasters? Is this some weird BSG commentary?My point is that 7 year old girls aren't any more "sexual" or whatever then a toaster. I mean, I just don't get how you can look at a little girl and see her as "sexualized" any more then you could a robot or whatever.
disingenuity thy name is delmoi -- Nothing... and like itWhat are you talking about? How is what I said disingenuous? Not everyone has the same experiences and responses as you do. If you put an 80 year old woman in an outfit like that, it wouldn't seem sexual. Why would any different with a 7 year old girl?
Okay, well, two things here. One, the outfit itself is sexual. -- PastabagelWell, that's very context dependent, isn't it? Someone who grew up in the middle east would find almost anything western women wear as "Sexual". Which was my point about someone who works in dance, and sees women wearing outfits like this all the time as part of their job, it wouldn't have the same impact.
Again, what are you on about? You're not even close to addressing the reason why most people are squicked out by this. You're just telling us that you don't view seven year old girls as sex objects. Good for you? I guess? -- (Arsenio) Hall and...I'm saying that I don't really understand how anyone else could either. It's just bizarre to me. Is the problem the idea that a pedophile could see this and get turned on?
Is your parole officer reading this or something? Bizarre. -- (Arsenio) Hall and...What everyone who doesn't agree with you is a pedophile or something? That's classy.
Is it sexualizing to put lingerie on a 7-year-old girl and then teach her a burlesque dance and then have her perform that dance? Yes.I just see it as kids pretending to be adults, which is what they do. I don't mean they are trying to "pretend to be sexy", they are just doing the moves without understanding any of the sexual content.
I have a friend whose 8 year old dances competitively. They attend a dance school where the director is determined to keep things appropriate for the ages of the kids participating but my friend came back from a regional competition recently and told me that most of the groups were performing along the lines of the horrific video above - it seems to be part of the culture of competitive dance. So much for having kids be kids. To my mind it's sad for the obvious reasons and also for the paucity of imagination used by the choreographers since there are lots of amazingly creative things one can do without sexualizing children.I don't think that the people putting these things on are all pedos, or think of what they are doing as "sexualizing" children.
What's the difference between this and kids imitating violence, and why is the latter more socially acceptable? With violence, there's a much bigger group of people saying "oh that's just harmless, they don't know what they're doing."The thing is, though, that Children do understand violence and are capable of engaging in it. In the past, stories about schoolyard fights were pretty common. But I don't find kids pretending to get into fights as a big problem. It's just pretend. People should explain to kids the consequences of acting on their ideas, not preventing ideas from entering their heads.
The type of clothes they're wearing, and the type of dance moves they're doing, did not spring forth into our society arbitrarily; they are the current state-of-the-art in clothing and dance moves expressly intended to titillate, to excite viewers into sufficient arousal to keep their attention.Yeah, maybe this is where the difference is. I don't really think of those outfits as being "sexual" overall. If I saw adult women doing this dance, I wouldn't think of it as overly sexual. It would just be a dance. Dancers wear outfits that are as revealing all the time, and I don't think of it all as being all that sexual.
"This is taken completely out of context,' Cory Miller, father of one of the girls, told 'Good Morning America' today. 'The girls weren't meant to be viewed by millions of people.'"OIC. So, it was meant only for a live audience and no one there could possibly have had any objections or concerns about the performance? Right?
« Older Bone - What Could Have Been.... | Steam, the hugely popular onli... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by gurple at 12:30 PM on May 12, 2010 [11 favorites]