The Holy Trinity : Daily Mail, Anime, Child Sexualisation.

shadesofgrey said:
Quite the opposit. You have me all wrong here, you're not actually listening to what I'm saying.
Click to expand...

You're not really saying much, to be fair.

I'll give you an example. I've never been to reddit, I had hardily even heard of it untill your post about the jailbait section. And I'm in my 30's... I'm also not an innocent 13 year old. Nor am I some creepy bloke yet to get into such creepy stuff, I've got kids ffs.
Click to expand...

Reddit is one of the most popular websi ... haven't I already said this? The fact that you didn't know it exists does not make the fact that it DID host childbait pictures any better.

But what about the creepy blokes who went to reddit jailbait section for the first time after reading your post and actually quite liked it?
Click to expand...

You mean the same internet population who could have read it on reddit itself, on two of the most widely used websites in the world and in the American pre ... hang on, haven't I already answered this too?

What about the creeps who did not catch the DM article but will after reading this thread. The ones who 'got those wrists limbered up'.
Click to expand...

See above.

Sure, criticize child porn etc, but for the love of your particular deity, why provide them with it.
Click to expand...

See above.

Thats just, kinda creepy too, dont you think? I seem to remember someone else saying it seems a little suspicious that you 'knew' too much about the subject in that thread... IDK you just seem a bit preoccupied with all this creepy stuff, why link it to the masses?
Click to expand...

See above but also quoting someone who was mudslinging because they weren't fond of me attacking their beloved reddit does not add anything to your argument.

Do you have anything else to add other than it's my fault for propogating the childbait which forums - which you don't read - did once provide? Can you even parse that last sentence and still feel you have a valid argument here?

In your own words, jog on.


e : I assume this is the barometer of popular taste and my child-liking ways you were referencing above?

"SKYNHEDD
PermaBanned

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 304

The OP suspiciously seems to know FAR too much about this subject.

Sick"
 
Last edited:
Again, relating to the OP and the DM in general.

I'm amazed this paper / website is still going......

The wife called me over to the PC to look at an article on the Total Recall so called "remake" (as the original was one of my favorite films)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2122364/Total-Recall-trailer-Colin-Farrell-Kate-Beckinsale-spring-action.html

Either they don't edit or proof read the stuff they print - or they do and just can't be bothered to take out any errors (as can be seen from the first paragraph in the article related to when the original was made - which was well over 12 years ago)
 
Last edited:
/sigh, Mags, just think about it.

You talk as if everyone knows about the things that you have linked. There are people on here who actually don't. And a small proportion of those, when they follow one of your links who will actually enjoy it.

So, in your own word, I ask you, why propagate it?

Fwiw I feel the same about the over publicised issue like you do, the DM should not be propagating such stuff either. It's creepy. So yeah, why join in, why tell more people about it, why give it (and the DM) more, hmmm, publicity?
 
shadesofgrey said:
/sigh, Mags, just think about it.

You talk as if everyone knows about the things that you have linked. There are people on here who actually don't. And a small proportion of those, when they follow one of your links who will actually enjoy it.
Click to expand...

These are not my links. These are links that were freely available on one of the most widely used websites on the internet. You really need to look at specifics, particlularly if you're going to accuse me of things I have not done or said.

So, in your own word, I ask you, why propagate it?
Click to expand...

In my own word? What does this mean?

Fwiw I feel the same about the over publicised issue like you do, the DM should not be propagating such stuff either. It's creepy. So yeah, why join in, why tell more people about it, why give it (and the DM) more, hmmm, publicity?
Click to expand...

You don't feel the same about it as I do. You want to push it under the carpet and I do not. I cannot even understand how you think you and I are on a page that even looks the same, far less IS the same.

p.s. I looked up your comments in the reddit childbait thread but didn't post them. They're there if anyone wants to go looking for background.
 
While I don't know much about it, I've always felt that some Anime sails very close to the wind when it comes to child related things.
 
So, because something is freely avaliable it's fine to send people to it? For real? I can understand the point that you are trying to make, but it makes no sense. I dont agree with beheading but I'm not going to give links to such things. Even if it is 'freely avaliable'. And they are your links, you know, the ones you copy and pasted into a forum?

I dont know about you, but linking to a site with a 15 year old girl in semi sexual poses and suggestive clothing is as bad as the paper who are printing it. Why? Have I not already covered this? You are giving some of the creeps what they are creeping after. Great job. You even acknowlage it by suggesting they get their wrists ready (yes I know it was sarcasm)

I'm not sweeping something under the carpet, why would I be asking you to think about about the part you are playing in propagating the very thing that you detest if I felt that way?

It errs me, because it is exactly what the DM have done. What further errs me is, before such things were over publicized (and im talking more, actual pedophillia here not just ephebophilia) I think such thoughts (and ofc heinous actions) never even crossed the vast majority of peoples minds. Now, pfft, its ****** everywhere, it's being put INTO peoples minds... some of those creeps would never even have thought about such things and, subsequently never have done those things either.

And yes, as I mention in your thread, you missed the sarcasm, sadly.


Edit: Oh, 'your word'. I was refering to the word 'propagating'.
 
Last edited:
I don't agree that discussing the innate child sexualisation in some current media is 'propogating' it.

In fact it is voicing the unacceptability of such as opposed to the silent acceptance that not pointing it out implies.

It would indeed be a sad state of affairs when we become afraid to stand by our principles and speak out against behaviour that is morally questionable in some misguided impression that to speak out would propogate such behaviour further.
 
Castiel said:
I don't agree that discussing the innate child sexualisation in some current media is 'propogating' it.

In fact it is voicing the unacceptability of such as opposed to the silent acceptance that not pointing it out implies.

It would indeed be a sad state of affairs when we become afraid to stand by our principles and speak out against behaviour that is morally questionable in some misguided impression that to speak out would propogate such behaviour further.
Click to expand...

My thoughts entirely.

How is burying your head in the sand and ignoring it all a better solution than raising the issue and promoting debate and awareness?
 
It is propagating it if you are linking to a site that has pictures of 15 year old girls in suggestive clothing and suggestive poses.

That is waaaaay different to starting a thread to talk about the sexualisation of children in the media.

I'm not suggesting the subject should not be touched on, nor that people should be afraid to voice such things.

After all, is that not what the DM are doing? Just like Mags? The only difference is one has a larger audience. (sarcasm)

For example. If I wanted to start a thread about racism, I would not post a link to a photo of some poor chap who had been gutted and beheaded then (well you get the drift) because of the colour of their skin... Because the racists out there, and here, whould get a kick out of it. No. I might talk about the incident, but no way would I give them a straight up link to the photo.

Yeah, spelt propagate wrong, good catch, enjoy the rush, belittling over something so petty is fun after all! :D

How am I being an apologist here anyway?
 
Last edited:
shadesofgrey said:
It is propagating it if you are linking to a site that has pictures of 15 year old girls in suggestive clothing and suggestive poses.

That is waaaaay different to starting a thread to talk about the sexualisation of children in the media.

I'm not suggesting the subject should not be touched on, nor that people should be afraid to voice such things. Is that not what the DM are doing? Just like Mags? The only difference is one has a larger audience. (sarcasm)

For example. If I wanted to start a thread about racism, I would not post a picture of some poor chap who had been gutted and beheaded then (well you get the drift) because of the colour of their skin because the racists out there, and here, whould get a kick out of it. No, I might talk about the incident, but no way would I give them a straight up link to the photo.

Yeah, spelt propagate wrong, good catch, enjoy the rush :D

How am I being an apologist here anyway?
Click to expand...


In fact many of the most successful advocates of anti-racism, anti-oppression and the various other moral and legal issues are underscored with examples of what the issue entails....in many cases the examples are extremely graphic and indicative.

This is because unless you illustrate exactly what you are opposed to, no-one takes much notice. Will someone, somewhere get off on those examples, probably...but the vast majority will not and the harder and more indicative the imagery, the more potent and effective the message.

I think you are barking up the wrong tree personally. What Magnolia is doing is giving an example of his point, he certainly is not propogating (I spell it wrong as well, don't worry) the issue he is opposed to, quite the opposite.
 
Last edited:
Aye. I hear you Castiel, and mainly agree. But I dont think a family friendly forum is the place to be linking photos like that to.

Although, you talk as if people should see the worse of all things. Pedophilla is bad, so lets post some real gritty photos of it on a forum where you know there are some really young people. No, lets not do that. (no I'm not talking about the ones mags linked to, I mean ones that you wouldn't want to see)

You were a solider right? You must have seen some bad things yeah? Would you show 13 year olds photos of those things? You know if you became really anti war or something.

It is propagating, just like the DM. If you claim mags is not part of it, then the DM is not either.
 
Last edited:
shadesofgrey said:
Aye. I hear you Castiel, and mainly agree. But I dont think a family friendly forum is the place to be linking photos like that to.

Although, you talk as if people should see the worse of all things. Pedophilla is bad, so lets post some real gritty photos of it on a forum where you know there are some really young people. No, lets not do that. (no I'm not talking about the ones mags linked to, I mean ones that you wouldn't want to see)

You were a solider right? You must have seen some bad things yeah? Would you show 13 year olds photos of those things? You know if you became really anti war or something.
Click to expand...

I don't think that Magnolia has posted 'the worse of all things' in that context...in fact I would say that the links are very tame compared to some images that are out there.

I agree that there are appropiate place to show certain images, I don't agree that Magnolia has overstepped the boundaries of this forum however with his links or his opposition to Hentai or Anime in general.

I think you need to assess the audience to which you are addressing and give appropiate and relevent information that is shocking, but not to such an extent that it overpowers or disgusts the audience so they shy away from discussing the issues it raises.

For example, you ask if I would show some of the images I witnessed to a 13 year old....that would depend on the context and the audience.

I would not show the corpses of children who have been desecrated in Congo to my 13 year old boy...however I would show them to a 13 year old Congolese boy who was in danger of being conscripted into a Child Militia. The context is everything.

I am anti-war btw......I just understand that sometimes War is unavoidable and in some cases necessary.

As far as this Thread goes, I think that your criticism of Magnolia is misplaced, I understand your point of view and in other circumstances I may very well support it, just not in this case.

In answer to your edit, I think that Magnolia is pointing out the ambiguity of the Daily Mail article insofar that it appears to be outraged, but is not sure at who or what it should direct that outrage.....is the Daily Mail propagating Child Sexualisation?...I don't think so, I think in its own way it is voicing concern over the issues raised by such behaviour and the causes or influences behind it.
 
Last edited:
Omg guys this thread was interesting till you two started spinning around on a ***** arguing.

I really dont see an issue with these girls its just a fad and it is not the sexualisation of girls in the slightest. Girls have much worse fads that there into these days and this is nothing.

Let them express themselves, tbfh that dakota and most of the looks she goes for is better then what girls of the age listed in the article seem to dress like anyway these days -_- sad but true.
 
Well, we shall have to agree and disagree all at the same time then :) yes, they are tame, but it errs me, that's all. People start with tame, and if they like it the chances are they will in the future, only worser and worser. Got to remember we are talking about sex here, it's different to killing, I'ld wager that there are more rapes than murders world wide.

The sigs err me as well, not all of them, obviously some of them are highly amusing. But a sig is like wearing a branded T-shirt, I don't know if it's still one of Mags sigs or not. But the reddit/jailbait one (with very little context to go on) was like advertising it? Can you grasp that? even if you don't agree?

I don't think the daily mail are being ambiguous, I think they simply know that photos of kids like that sells papers. They are making money off the backs of both sides of the audience, the righteous and the creepy. The media is feeding it to us, creating the hunger for it, and I think there is a fine line between how we respond to it with our social media. That's if we should even directly respond to singular, I'll call them incidents, or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom