We are determined to encourage thoughtful discussion, so please be respectful to others. We also provide a set of Commenting Options - comment/commenter highlighting and ignoring, and commenter archives that you can access by clicking the commenter options button (
). Go to our Commenting Guidelines page for more details, including how to report offensive and spam commenting.
@ fuster:
I think I catch yer drift, but I figgered you could stand the 2nd ‘tube. We’re all grown-ups here…
Or is that the problem?
That show was kind of sentimental favorite of mine, the other tube, I’m not commenting on
@ CK MacLeod:Yer not catching my drift at all.
Tagged: [empty]
@ fuster:
Thought you wanted me to cram the 2nd ‘tube into a dysfunctional tag, like you like to do. If you’ve got some suggestions for tags, feel free to utilize your awesome editing powers to add ’em. Just please no URLs.
naw, I hate those dyssy tag tubes.
Not a fan of the sexualization of children, even under cover of irony.
in the land of the blind, the one-eyed snake is king.
@ bob:
Me neither, as I thought I made clear – but there it is on YouTube, available to all, and I thought the fact was worth noting. Check out the comments at the site.
@ CK MacLeod:
Was thinking about using the video below, but don’t want it on the main page… too creepy. Raises… issues.
Then why use it at all when all you’re doing is telling us your internet is back on?
but there it is on YouTube, available to all, and I thought the fact was worth noting.
I just don’t agree.
bob wrote:
Then why use it at all when all you’re doing is telling us your internet is back on?
The occasion is irrelevant. I might have used the fact that my internet is back on as an excuse to get into almost anything, just as I use the fact that I have an internet connection in the first place to get into almost anything.
As for whether it was worth noting, we may just have to agree to disagree on that. We’ve had previous discussion on cultural attitudes toward child sexuality, and we may have more at some future time. When it comes to potential controversial material, I think we should err on the side of inclusion on borderline instances – and I don’t think that the video is obscene, or that it was created with a pornographic intention. I think its makers may be a lot naive or a little sick or both, but I don’t see that as a good reason for us to censor ourselves. Any other policy would tend to squelch discussion.
@ CK MacLeod:
I’m with Bob on this one.
@ CK
I’m sure that you did not mean to do anything other than point scorn on that kiddy vid, but when people think that kids are being exploited, it’s not a bit of potential controversial material, it’s most def contro.
@ bob.
showing it ain’t agreeing with it and it ain’t necessarily joining in the exploitation.
this definitely needs tags.