Zaphod
Jedi
I've been having this argument with various people recently; and it's a difficult one. It appears on one hand that society, and quite rightly, severely punishes those who predate on children. I'm sure everyone reading this board fully understands why this is the only moral and sane course of action and has no issue with the stance the establishment takes on this however, things like this make me wonder if the establishment, and the moral judgement of the masses, really are singing from the same hymn sheet on this one:
_http://celebrities.ninemsn.com.au/blog.aspx?blogentryid=585857&showcomments=true&rss=yes
There's also been stories in our recent history regarding junior poll dancing kits, Harry Potter broomsticks which vibrate, bras for tots, high-heels for tots, child make-up etc; so it's far from being an isolated event and it's difficult to describe how utterly bizarrely freakish it all looks. I can't answer for others but I find looking at the page above puts me in mind of peering in to an alternative reality where laws and sound moral judgement regarding child-prositution, child pornography, grooming of youngsters etc, simply don't exist.
It would be tempting to put this down to merely consumer exploitation of another demographic however, there are two problems I have with that argument. If we look at a lot of modern popular culture we find this same meme repeating. As an example: the music of people like Christina Aguilera, Britney Spears.. Jeez these people infest my tv every day and I can't think of half of their names but the acts are all the same ... Turn on any music channel and what do you find? Tween-look acts with exaggerated moves, big smiles, primary colours, flashing lights, childlike verbal and melodic repetition and so on. These are techniques which are understood in the teaching profession as a way of reaching youngsters, as nothing else holds their attention. And the underlying theme behind these acts, in the way they dress, dance, in the lyrical content and facial expression... it's sex, with an alarmingly thin veil.. aimed right down the nose at the child psyche.
The other problem with that argument of course, is that virtually all exploitation of children falls under the 'consumerism' heading sooner or later.
Then of course we have the fashion industry.. awash with imagery of scantily clad girls who, even if they are out of school, have been quite deliberately made to look like they're not.
Ok, there's more but let's not labour the point. Why is it, on one level, society is apparently being encouraged, through exactly this sort of imagery and product, in the blatant sexualisation of children; and then on another level, being punished for acting on that imagery, by the very same establishment that created it and publicised it in the first place? Why is it on one level, we can't photograph our own children, we can't sit in a park for too long, we're not allowed in a school without a background check, if we find ourselves sitting next to a child on certain airlines whilst being male, we are humiliatingly forced to move to another seat .. yet on another level, we are presented with the link above .. blatant sexualised imagery involving children
Or to ask it from another slightly rhetorical angle, would we be likely to see a reduction in opportunistic abuse cases, if this sort of dangerous nonsense were made illegal?... which actually I think it probably already is, it's just for some bizarre reason our laws and morals don't seem to apply at this level.
And that makes me further wonder, if over a period of time, this has a sort of 'ponerizing' effect on many who are subjected to it. Since it seems, we can make some non-psychopaths behave like psychopaths (at least in the short term) simply through external stimuli, can the same thing be achieved with sexual inclination in some?
_http://celebrities.ninemsn.com.au/blog.aspx?blogentryid=585857&showcomments=true&rss=yes
There's also been stories in our recent history regarding junior poll dancing kits, Harry Potter broomsticks which vibrate, bras for tots, high-heels for tots, child make-up etc; so it's far from being an isolated event and it's difficult to describe how utterly bizarrely freakish it all looks. I can't answer for others but I find looking at the page above puts me in mind of peering in to an alternative reality where laws and sound moral judgement regarding child-prositution, child pornography, grooming of youngsters etc, simply don't exist.
It would be tempting to put this down to merely consumer exploitation of another demographic however, there are two problems I have with that argument. If we look at a lot of modern popular culture we find this same meme repeating. As an example: the music of people like Christina Aguilera, Britney Spears.. Jeez these people infest my tv every day and I can't think of half of their names but the acts are all the same ... Turn on any music channel and what do you find? Tween-look acts with exaggerated moves, big smiles, primary colours, flashing lights, childlike verbal and melodic repetition and so on. These are techniques which are understood in the teaching profession as a way of reaching youngsters, as nothing else holds their attention. And the underlying theme behind these acts, in the way they dress, dance, in the lyrical content and facial expression... it's sex, with an alarmingly thin veil.. aimed right down the nose at the child psyche.
The other problem with that argument of course, is that virtually all exploitation of children falls under the 'consumerism' heading sooner or later.
Then of course we have the fashion industry.. awash with imagery of scantily clad girls who, even if they are out of school, have been quite deliberately made to look like they're not.
Ok, there's more but let's not labour the point. Why is it, on one level, society is apparently being encouraged, through exactly this sort of imagery and product, in the blatant sexualisation of children; and then on another level, being punished for acting on that imagery, by the very same establishment that created it and publicised it in the first place? Why is it on one level, we can't photograph our own children, we can't sit in a park for too long, we're not allowed in a school without a background check, if we find ourselves sitting next to a child on certain airlines whilst being male, we are humiliatingly forced to move to another seat .. yet on another level, we are presented with the link above .. blatant sexualised imagery involving children
Or to ask it from another slightly rhetorical angle, would we be likely to see a reduction in opportunistic abuse cases, if this sort of dangerous nonsense were made illegal?... which actually I think it probably already is, it's just for some bizarre reason our laws and morals don't seem to apply at this level.
And that makes me further wonder, if over a period of time, this has a sort of 'ponerizing' effect on many who are subjected to it. Since it seems, we can make some non-psychopaths behave like psychopaths (at least in the short term) simply through external stimuli, can the same thing be achieved with sexual inclination in some?
