Curse

pumpkin pie · Jun 17, 2009, 01:56 AM // 01:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenix

I'm with Snow Bunny. Drinking is lots and lots of fun. THAT'S why the cool kids do it.

that's why the cool kids do it << its peer pressure talking

Engage · Jun 17, 2009, 02:16 AM // 02:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

When was the last time you got laid, bro?

A possible attempt at levity? Or maybe not. I can understand why you would assume such, given the nature of my post, but let me assure you, making such assumptions, or in your case, implying them, serves no merit, and is a bit steadfast given how much you know about me. For all you know, I could be some sex-crazed female, however unlikely that may be.

The sole intent of the post you quoted was not to diminish the importance of sexual acts, but rather to note the extent at which they have been infused into our reality. One can say, we have been desensitized by such things, and I would have to agree.

fenix · Jun 17, 2009, 03:35 AM // 03:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

that's why the cool kids do it << its peer pressure talking

Not really. Drinking is great fun. It's only stupid people that do it wrong. If I had have known how much fun it is to go out and have a few bevvy's with my mates when I was in high school, I'd have been drinking too.

DreamRunner · Jun 17, 2009, 03:37 AM // 03:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by I pwnd U

No image will ever have that effect, thus why I was saying media influence and not simply that picture is going to make people want to have sex. The reason teenage pregnancy is decreasing imo is not because of less sex but because of earlier sex education. Parents are start to let girls go on the pill earlier and younger kids don't get strange looks when buying condoms because it is becoming more socially acceptable (which is BS). That is how it is around here anyways.

Found a short abstract that overviews some media influence for ya.

http://www.jahonline.org/article/S10...200-4/abstract

Also

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl...=viewport&pg=1

(Read just the abstract on that one)

According to them the media has an influence. The media does not necessarily get the pregnant but by displaying sex as okay it can lead to it. With the media recently starting to promote safe sex more teenagers are starting to practice safe sex.

For other countries having different ideas of what under aged pregnancy is would skew teenage pregnancies. But for just America it doesn't. Even still the media does have an impact on teenagers no matter it being sex, alcohol or doing something to be accepted. (Stereotypes from TV shows, the jock is always cool and gets all the girls, geeks/nerds have to wear thick glasses)

That was just another example to support media influence, not something to really focus on.

And I have no problem with that. My mom used to do that before we were all old enough to take care of ourselves. She then went back to school and got a degree and now teaches. Many women today still do that and enjoy it very much. But 500 years ago that is what was expected of them and what they did. Today many hold jobs and the such but are not required too.

(Was going to mention that earlier but I forgot)

As I said, no one is denying that the media has influence! But you are trying to put the image with a direct link towards teenage pregnancy, which not only absurd but stupid as well. But since you cannot make a direct cause, it is pointless to try and make this go any further. Lets not forget, you did try in your first post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by I pwnd U

People wonder why so many teens are getting pregnant, well thanks to the media and ads such as these basically saying it is okay kids feel like not only should they do it, but they have to because everyone else is.

But okay for argument sake again, the media has a indirect cause towards sex. However, and this is the best part, teenage pregnancies are down because the media promotes safe sex, but advertises sex which lead towards teenage pregnancy! Funny, no?

lets not forget that you have TV, internet and other forms of medias that display lots of sexual acts, but you have the nerve to say that the image isn't okay because its sexual. They're also clothing that are also sexual are you going to say that the clothing is okay as well? What I am trying to say is the line that is drawn becomes a slippery-slop.

Engage · Jun 17, 2009, 04:28 AM // 04:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamRunner

lets not forget that you have TV, internet and other forms of medias that display lots of sexual acts, but you have the nerve to say that the image isn't okay because its sexual. They're also clothing that are also sexual are you going to say that the clothing is okay as well? What I am trying to say is the line that is drawn becomes a slippery-slop.

He was addressing the image as it truly is, a symptom of a much larger problem - the desensitization of our youth. He was in no way trying to pin the entirety of the problem on one billboard. If sex sells, it automatically makes sense to target younger and younger audiences. They seek absolution in the fact that they propagate the notion of safe sex, as you said.

I pwnd U · Jun 17, 2009, 10:44 AM // 10:44

Quote:

As I said, no one is denying that the media has influence! But you are trying to put the image with a direct link towards teenage pregnancy, which not only absurd but stupid as well. But since you cannot make a direct cause, it is pointless to try and make this go any further. Lets not forget, you did try in your first post.

Read the first post, I said media and ADS such as these, not this ad in particular. I never said this ad alone lead to teen pregnancy.

Quote:

But okay for argument sake again, the media has a indirect cause towards sex. However, and this is the best part, teenage pregnancies are down because the media promotes safe sex, but advertises sex which lead towards teenage pregnancy! Funny, no?

Funny, no it is not. Real, yes. It had lead to increased sex and more then likely teen pregnancy (more sex, greater chance of having a teen pregnancy). When everyone was like OMGWTF my 16 yr old is pregnant! the media started portraying more safe sex. I see more condom commercials now then I ever did when I was younger. I don't know the up to date stats on teen pregnancy. I know it is an issue because hell my sister was one of those people.

Quote:

He was addressing the image as it truly is, a symptom of a much larger problem - the desensitization of our youth. He was in no way trying to pin the entirety of the problem on one billboard. If sex sells, it automatically makes sense to target younger and younger audiences. They seek absolution in the fact that they propagate the notion of safe sex, as you said.

Thank you, someone got it!

Etta · Jun 17, 2009, 11:39 AM // 11:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Engage

For all you know, I could be some sex-crazed female.

Well, well. This is very interesting.

Anyway, I don't see nobody complain about wonderbras ad.

DreamRunner · Jun 17, 2009, 02:47 PM // 14:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by I pwnd U

Read the first post, I said media and ADS such as these, not this ad in particular. I never said this ad alone lead to teen pregnancy.

Funny, no it is not. Real, yes. It had lead to increased sex and more then likely teen pregnancy (more sex, greater chance of having a teen pregnancy). When everyone was like OMGWTF my 16 yr old is pregnant! the media started portraying more safe sex. I see more condom commercials now then I ever did when I was younger. I don't know the up to date stats on teen pregnancy. I know it is an issue because hell my sister was one of those people.

The ad such as these. Do you really understand what you are saying? You said the meaning of the image has some common direct link with others ads that influence teen pregnancy. So by what you said, the image has to have some direct cause towards teen pregnancy.

So if people are having more sex than ever before, but teen pregnancy is down. Doesn't that mean that sex doesn't increase the chance of teen pregnancy?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Engage

He was addressing the image as it truly is, a symptom of a much larger problem - the desensitization of our youth. He was in no way trying to pin the entirety of the problem on one billboard. If sex sells, it automatically makes sense to target younger and younger audiences. They seek absolution in the fact that they propagate the notion of safe sex, as you said.

Ah I see. But that is very different to what he is actually saying. But even still people that are worried about their children, this is nothing new. I mean if people are so worried about sexual acts that are displayed by products, maybe they have to look at role-models of men and women. Men and women that change their bodies to become more sexually attractive or perform better sexually by using pills. And, if you are really trying to shield your kids or younger youth from sex and all bad things in the world, you should look at how girls earn as a majority group in university and high school. The speaker of the house in Congress is female as well.
As I said before, teen pregnancy is also declining since 1990 and drug, alcohol use is also declining in teenagers. I mean if we are so worried about doom and gloom, I very much doubt it will come, from a sex ad.

Yang Whirlwind · Jun 17, 2009, 04:10 PM // 16:10

They got the concept wrong! A threesome should always consist of two girls ... and me

Etta · Jun 17, 2009, 05:32 PM // 17:32

Yang has a point. Yeah if this was 3 girls and 1 guy (me) then everyone would just go about their day. To be fair, thumps up to the girl all those guys for herself, women these days eh?

I actually want to hear more of what female members thoughts about this. Pumpkin doesn't count.

Shursh · Jun 17, 2009, 05:34 PM // 17:34

I have no problem with the youth of today becoming desensitized to stuff like this - i think it would be a good thing, actually, since then everyone wouldn't be so uptight about sex.

HOWEVER, i do agree that if this is to happen (which it clearly is, given this ad), then there should be more sex ed, and at a younger age. think of it this way - when you were really little, your parents probably told you not to cross the street without looking both ways, or not to take candy from strangers. these are two major rules that pretty much everyone (at least in america, i can't vouch for other countries) grows up with.

imagine if those rules were appended with "always use a condom if you are going to have sex" and "STD's are real and will cause severe health problems".

^ I'm betting that would decrease teen pregnancies.

same thing with drugs and alcohol - desensitization coupled with education.

EDIT: and i agree with yang and etta, 3 girls and 1 guy (me) would be better lol. although vice versa isn't bad either if everyone knows their boundaries *points to the two dudes on the couch*

pumpkin pie · Jun 17, 2009, 07:48 PM // 19:48

wait! what?? why don't I count?

Unlucky Slayer · Jun 17, 2009, 07:51 PM // 19:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

wait! what?? why don't I count?

Because you havent given out your age and a lot of us guys dont like the thought of jail time due to underage girls.

I pwnd U · Jun 17, 2009, 07:59 PM // 19:59

Quote:

The ad such as these. Do you really understand what you are saying? You said the meaning of the image has some common direct link with others ads that influence teen pregnancy. So by what you said, the image has to have some direct cause towards teen pregnancy.

And you said show me THIS ad, one SINGLE ad. I was simply pointing out that I was talking about MORE than ONE ad.

Here is from the other post.

Quote:

that the image alone

fenix · Jun 17, 2009, 10:29 PM // 22:29

Has anyone considered that this is not a threesome, but actually a foursome?

haggus71 · Jun 18, 2009, 01:56 AM // 01:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenix

Has anyone considered that this is not a threesome, but actually a foursome?

Nah. The boy on the floor is probably just getting hot watching the other three.

I saw the add and laughed. For one thing, it's about time Times Square got back some of that smut Adolf Giuliani kicked out. On another level...it's not like any of those boys in the add know where a clitoris is, much less how to please that girl. It would TAKE three of them!

Now, if Jamie Foxx, Tyson, and Tyrese were in that ad with the same girl, you KNOW that ad would come down on three days tops! Because with the three of them, you know that girl would be getting pleased, and not too many people would be happy about it.

Akuma · Jun 18, 2009, 02:02 AM // 02:02

itt: nerds getting angry about a pointless picture

Snow Bunny · Jun 18, 2009, 02:29 AM // 02:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Engage

For all you know, I could be some sex-crazed female, however unlikely that may be.

Nope, you're "HiddenDelight", and I know what you look like, so that argument doesn't work.

There's nothing wrong with sex...people have to learn about it sometime. Kids under 12 won't get what's going on, and kids 12-16 giggle about it anyway, so what's the harm in it?

DreamRunner · Jun 18, 2009, 03:47 AM // 03:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by I pwnd U

And you said show me THIS ad, one SINGLE ad. I was simply pointing out that I was talking about MORE than ONE ad.

Here is from the other post.

I said it because you said there is a direct link, which is what you said in your first post before I EVER posted in this thread. Now, did you go back in time or something?

edit: I really can't be bothered now, simply because of a person that isn't clear when expressing himself. The thread is pointless now and I am done.

Engage · Jun 18, 2009, 05:11 AM // 05:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Nope, you're "HiddenDelight", and I know what you look like, so that argument doesn't work.

You omitted my actual argument from your post, and it still stands. All you did was prove my example of who I might be, partially void. I also noted how unlikely it was that I really was telling the truth, at that moment, just in case you or anyone else missed the obvious sarcasm, but you did, anyway. You have yet to gauge me as a person. You know my gender and my previous name on Guru, congratulations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

There's nothing wrong with sex...people have to learn about it sometime. Kids under 12 won't get what's going on, and kids 12-16 giggle about it anyway, so what's the harm in it?

There is obviously nothing wrong with the act itself. It is how it has been blown up into something that the media can perpetuate, via advertisements, merchandise, word-of-mouth, etc., which should bring concern, and is the primary focus of this thread. Sex, while not in itself harmful, can be used inappropriately, by those not educated properly in the subject. Kids 12-16 do not necessarily giggle about sex. I wish it were so, but it is not. I knew a few people who already had a few kids by the time they were 16-17. They had little education, a poor job, and their living conditions were sketchy at best.