| |
Discussion: "Chandelier" video inappropriate
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 19,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by LadyGagaStan93
Child ****ography isn't the ONLY outlet for pedophiles that is all I'm saying. Pedophilles do share pictures of clothed children. Why do you think those people stalk the parks? It's not only about child ****ography it's deeper than that. It's not ridiculous at all.
|
So because some pedophiles also get off to pictures of fully clothed children, we should just allow more provocative, stimulating material to be allowed on the internet? All because "they'd probably use less provocative, less-stimulating material anyway." Sounds pretty ridiculous if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/17/2011
Posts: 32,412
|
Sweety, my point is that a pedophile is going to find whatever stimulating material as stimulating and there's simply nothing you can do about it. As sad as that is, it's the truth. I'll say it again, they're called child predators and not child ****ographers for a reason. They prey on children, not just naked/sexualized children.
You sound like a person with a good heart though so kudos to you for sticking up for the helpless children.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/20/2011
Posts: 3,275
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Flame
Dear lord. Being naked doesn't mean that she's being sexualized. She's not even naked. I don't even know what the **** you would be pleased with. It's has a deep message and NONE of it is sexualized or inappropriate. It's actually very touching in my opinion. You're the one who is going too far with it.
|
But why use a child for this? A young looking 18+ adult could have done the job and gotten the point across. Either someone didn't consider the implications of using an eleven year in this manner, or someone did and decided to do it anyway because it's controversial.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/5/2014
Posts: 688
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RatedG²
bye. You ask us for opinions then "drag" us when we don't agree. Like if you didn't wanna hear you shouldn't have asked
|
I dragged you for being insensitive to rape and child ****ography. Not for disagreeing with me. Go read your comments again and repent for your actions.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/5/2014
Posts: 688
|
Quote:
Originally posted by LadyGagaStan93
Sweety, my point is that a pedophile is going to find whatever stimulating material as stimulating and there's simply nothing you can do about it. As sad as that is, it's the truth. I'll say it again, they're called child predators and not child ****ographers for a reason. They prey on children, not just naked/sexualized children.
You sound like a person with a good heart though so kudos to you for sticking up for the helpless children.
|
So what is your opinion of the video?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 19,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Haus_of_Will
You're looking for something that isn't there.
Then the fault is at the grown man for his action, are you excusing him because the girl wore a skirt? |
WHAT THE ****?! NO. I'm not excusing him at all. I said she was 8 years old. He shouldn't be looking at her like that at all. But the fact of the matter is, because there are evil, disgusting pedophiles like this in the world, we need to implement safety measures at every turn in order to protect our children.
For example, young parents (like my siblings) know, that if you want to share photos on Facbeook of your young babies, toddlers, and 5-10 years sharing a bath or enjoying their childhood at the beach or in a backyard pool, then you make sure that your account is on private. You make sure that you trust every single one of your Facebook friends. Or, as many of my siblings friends do, you keep those photos private and don't upload them to the internet at all.
What a disgusting thing to say. I'm not blaming the child for wearing a skirt. I'm recognising that there is evil in this world, and you need to protect children at every turn, especially when it comes to the internet.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/20/2011
Posts: 8,848
|
Quote:
Originally posted by uhoh-ohno
But why use a child for this? A young looking 18+ adult could have done the job and gotten the point across. Either someone didn't consider the implications of using an eleven year in this manner, or someone did and decided to do it anyway because it's controversial.
|
Sia got Maddie Zeigler to do the video because she was a fan of the child on the show Dance Moms.
There is probably an importance/meaning to the child's performance too, but fishing for controversy is reaching.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 19,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by LadyGagaStan93
Sweety, my point is that a pedophile is going to find whatever stimulating material as stimulating and there's simply nothing you can do about it. As sad as that is, it's the truth. I'll say it again, they're called child predators and not child ****ographers for a reason. They prey on children, not just naked/sexualized children.
You sound like a person with a good heart though so kudos to you for sticking up for the helpless children.
|
You didn't answer my question though. By your logic, because a pedophile is going to sexualise fully-clothed children anyway, does that mean that we as a society shouldn't bother minimising content being published online that shows children in more minimal, transparent clothing, in contorted, exposing positions?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/5/2014
Posts: 688
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Haus_of_Will
Sia got Maddie Zeigler to do the video because she was a fan of the child on the show Dance Moms.
There is probably an importance/meaning to the child's performance too, but fishing for controversy is reaching. |
The attire and the sexualizing of a young child is not reaching. Reach for a Bible, because you aren't seeing how wrong that is.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 2,534
|
I seriously can't tell if the op is trolling in here  but no it's not inappropriate/sexualized.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/17/2011
Posts: 32,412
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Rihinvention
You didn't answer my question though. By your logic, because a pedophile is going to sexualise fully-clothed children anyway, does that mean that we as a society shouldn't bother minimising content being published online that shows children in more minimal, transparent clothing, in contorted, exposing positions?
|
Sexualization and nudity are not one in the same, that was my point and that answers your question. So I'm not sure what you mean, but okay.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/5/2014
Posts: 688
|
Quote:
Originally posted by HolyKatyPerry
I seriously can't tell if the op is trolling in here but no it's not inappropriate/sexualized. |
I don't troll. I was RAPED and was appalled by this video and worried for that young girl.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 19,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by LadyGagaStan93
Sexualization and nudity are not one in the same, that was my point and that answers your question. So I'm not sure what you mean, but okay.
|
But...nudity is far more sexualised than non-nudity. So, no, it doesn't answer my question.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/13/2012
Posts: 29,559
|
I'm surprised there aren't more people in here who agree with the OP.
All I know is that I would not be comfortable with my younger sibling in a nude outfit like that for the whole world to see 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/22/2005
Posts: 13,429
|
Absolutely not.
She's a child. The video is not sexualizing her in any way, shape or form.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/5/2014
Posts: 688
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Vespertine
I'm surprised there aren't more people in here who agree with the OP.
All I know is that I would not be comfortable with my younger sibling in a nude outfit like that for the whole world to see |
Thank you. I think most of the people on ATRL aren't able to comprehend what is happening to this girl by appearing in this video.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/5/2014
Posts: 688
|
Quote:
Originally posted by .Chad.
Absolutely not.
She's a child. The video is not sexualizing her in any way, shape or form.
|
She's a child in a nude body suit, twerking with her ass facing the camera. Are u serious? Like are you serious?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 19,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by .Chad.
Absolutely not.
She's a child. The video is not sexualizing her in any way, shape or form.
|
But just because the video doesn't intend to sexualise her, doesn't mean there are some sick pedophiles in this world who WILL sexualise her. Isn't it our duty as adult to protects our children from these sorts of people?
There are probably tens of thousands of pedophiles all across the world who've masturbated to this video, probably countless times. I know if it were my niece, there's no way I would be ok with that.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/5/2014
Posts: 688
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Rihinvention
But just because the video doesn't intend to sexualise her, doesn't mean there are some sick pedophiles in this world who WILL sexualise her. Isn't it our duty as adult to protects our children from these sorts of people?
There are probably tens of thousands of pedophiles all across the world who've masturbated to this video, probably countless times. I know if it were my niece, there's no way I would be ok with that.
|
I agree 100% what don't these people get about that
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/20/2011
Posts: 8,848
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Rihinvention
WHAT THE ****?! NO. I'm not excusing him at all. I said she was 8 years old. He shouldn't be looking at her like that at all. But the fact of the matter is, because there are evil, disgusting pedophiles like this in the world, we need to implement safety measures at every turn in order to protect our children.
For example, young parents (like my siblings) know, that if you want to share photos on Facbeook of your young babies, toddlers, and 5-10 years sharing a bath or enjoying their childhood at the beach or in a backyard pool, then you make sure that your account is on private. You make sure that you trust every single one of your Facebook friends. Or, as many of my siblings friends do, you keep those photos private and don't upload them to the internet at all.
What a disgusting thing to say. I'm not blaming the child for wearing a skirt. I'm recognising that there is evil in this world, and you need to protect children at every turn, especially when it comes to the internet.
|
I apologize for my implication, but your fear (while justifiable) is not applicable to this non-sexual video.
Yes Maddie is wearing a leotard but that is standard for the free form in ballet.
It is nude to not distract from the performance with a contrasting color.
And the outlines that you see are anatomical structures that come from the human form, they are not emphasized.
Quote:
Originally posted by dazjaali
The attire and the sexualizing of a young child is not reaching. Reach for a Bible, because you aren't seeing how wrong that is.
|
Sis do you know how many tween moms with very adult husbands (Mary included) are in the Bible?
-----------------------------------------
Deeming this video inappropriate because a pedophile can masturbate to it is absurd because the claim can be umbrella'd to a majority of children's activities in the media.
Should we protest middle school swimming competitions because their spandex is too tight and revealing?
It's a reactionary statement that is founded in good will but is rooted absurdly in its fear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
