Viral video of 8-year-old 'pole dancer' draws controversy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LayO1wW-b2o

I can see how some people have a problem with this, but nothing about it struck me as inappropriate. I actually just thought it was pretty amazing; really athletic and inventive. I'd be interested to see what others think about it.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LayO1wW-b2o

I can see how some people have a problem with this, but nothing about it struck me as inappropriate. I actually just thought it was pretty amazing; really athletic and inventive. I'd be interested to see what others think about it.

That`s because you normal mate and not a sick fuck

Ben_Reilly wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LayO1wW-b2o

I can see how some people have a problem with this, but nothing about it struck me as inappropriate. I actually just thought it was pretty amazing; really athletic and inventive. I'd be interested to see what others think about it.

Agreed 100%, nothing wrong here.
I know a few mums and their daughters do this for sport and fun.
I forsee no doubt in the future this being an olympic event to be honest.
Pole dancing may have started out in a sexual manner but there is no reason that it can be serpated to be an art/sport for people to enjoy watching without any sexulization wrongly attached

Thanks KD, and I was thinking the same thing, Bras. In Shakespeare's time actresses were considered very disreputable, and being a geisha today is a lot different from its origins. Jazz music was considered vulgar; now it's practically considered "classical" music.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Thanks KD, and I was thinking the same thing, Bras. In Shakespeare's time actresses were considered very disreputable, and being a geisha today is a lot different from its origins. Jazz music was considered vulgar; now it's practically considered "classical" music.

Look at Elvis just over 5o years ago being banned from the waste down as his moves were seen as too sexual.
Thankfully attitudes rightly change

Ben, can you delete my account?

that is insane
that is awesome gymnastics of the highest level....

give her a movie, make her spider-girl !!!

Are you aware of what the pole represents?

Verda wrote:
Are you aware of what the pole represents?

In this case, I think the pole is what she needs to perform moves like that. Why do you want your account deleted? (And you can actually do that yourself.) And who are you?

she shows great skills (and her country should look at her for the Olympics) but in my opinion the pole is not appropriate.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Verda wrote:
Are you aware of what the pole represents?

In this case, I think the pole is what she needs to perform moves like that. Why do you want your account deleted? (And you can actually do that yourself.) And who are you?

I really can't mate - I'll send you a pm. I don't know why you would ask who I am when I introduced myself to you straightaway?

Verda wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Verda wrote:
Are you aware of what the pole represents?

In this case, I think the pole is what she needs to perform moves like that. Why do you want your account deleted? (And you can actually do that yourself.) And who are you?

I really can't mate - I'll send you a pm. I don't know why you would ask who I am when I introduced myself to you straightaway?

OK, I'll delete you. As far as not knowing who you are, well, I've probably slept since then ...

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Verda wrote:


I really can't mate - I'll send you a pm. I don't know why you would ask who I am when I introduced myself to you straightaway?

OK, I'll delete you. As far as not knowing who you are, well, I've probably slept since then ...

Thankyou.

it is a sport
it is a pole it represents the same as the horse or double bars... Unless you are a pervert.

http://www.australianpolechampionships.com.au/state--regional-championships.html

traditional Indian Gymnastics


Chinese

I'm not a pervert thank you - just expressing my opinion.

Cass wrote:I'm not a pervert thank you - just expressing my opinion.

Perhaps it is because we are the mothers of daughters. I think she is an amazing gymnast, and in some ways would not have objected to the pole if she wore leggings or tights. I think the pole has a significance, but doing the moves she does in a tiny pair of knickers that barely cover her, is not something i would have let my girls do.

@cass
it was originally aimed at the Now Guest poster

BUT what does it represent? was that act in anyway sexual?
how is it different than pretty much all other Gymnastics?

risingsun wrote:

Cass wrote:I'm not a pervert thank you - just expressing my opinion.

Perhaps it is because we are the mothers of daughters.  I think she is an amazing gymnast, and in some ways would not have objected to the pole if she wore leggings or tights.   I think the pole has a significance, but doing the moves she does in a tiny pair of knickers that barely cover her, is not something i would have let my girls do.

I saw somebody else saying something like that -- to me it's not any more inappropriate than a swimsuit though, and apparently dancers can't get a grip in leggings.

I'm sure part of it is that in my world, the stripper type of pole dancing is something that happens in bad movies. Also, I've really never been one to read sexual undertones into things, like I have never understood how Elvis' dancing scandalized people.

If the girl had been making lewd moves, that would be one thing, but I have a hard time seeing how the mere presence of two poles in her routine is automatically wrong or bad.

Yet the chinese fella in the video above is wearing leggings? No, she wasn't doing lewd moves in any way, she was however doing extreme splits, barely being covered, and I don't think I'd want an 8 year old daughter of mine to do that. I'm afraid when you have daughters and they are young, you have to think about protecting them.

risingsun wrote:Yet the chinese fella in the video above is wearing legging?

Well, that's a good point (I hadn't watched the video yet).

I don't know, it just doesn't bother me -- maybe because I'm around young female athletes all the time, it doesn't faze me. I guess we all have our things; plenty of people are fine with child beauty pageants and I find them very creepy on the whole.

It doesn't faze me in the least, but at her age as a mother I would be concerned about the costume in view of the moves.

but he mainly using his feet and hands
I dont even see anything wrong with the outfit
standard swimwear you people just live in places too cold

where is the original OP from? is it Romania?

veya_victaous wrote:but he mainly using his feet and hands
I dont even see anything wrong with the outfit
standard swimwear you people just live in places too cold

where is the original OP from? is it Romania?

A different upload on YouTube says the show's in Romania and she's from the Ukraine.

risingsun wrote:It doesn't faze me in the least, but at her age as a mother I would be concerned about the costume in view of the moves.

I think that is what bothered me as much as the symbolism of the pole.

btw I have two boys lol

@veya no worries but still think it was uncalled for. I wasn't aware of it as a sport but thanks for the info.

@ben - I agree about child pagents as well as child dance groups.....my main objection is early sexualization of children

Cass wrote:

risingsun wrote:It doesn't faze me in the least, but at her age as a mother I would be concerned about the costume in view of the moves.

I think that is what bothered me as much as the symbolism of the pole.

btw I have two boys lol

@veya no worries but still think it was uncalled for. I wasn't aware of it as a sport but thanks for the info.

@ben - I agree about child pagents as well as child dance groups.....my main objection is early sexualization of children

Totally agreed, there's no reason for a little girl to be wearing blush, lipstick, hair extensions ... I just have to say, though, that I don't see what's sexual about this ... ? Is there anything in her routine that's suggestive? If so, I'm not seeing it.

I think she's a prodigy, who appears to enjoy what she's doing, and in that light, I think it would be kind of an oppressive, sucky thing to take that away, kind of like telling a kid to stop singing because he/she is going to be a lawyer like her mother/father, dammit And usually I don't think that much of dance as an art form, but this kid did things I didn't think of as things people can do -- it's impressive.

It's sort of how I think of Art Tatum's piano runs, or Robert Johnson's guitar playing. Lots of people who heard them play thought they must have had accompaniment; they were surprising virtuosos, and I think this girl might become that type of performer, in her milieu.

risingsun wrote:

Cass wrote:I'm not a pervert thank you - just expressing my opinion.

Perhaps it is because we are the mothers of daughters.  I think she is an amazing gymnast, and in some ways would not have objected to the pole if she wore leggings or tights.   I think the pole has a significance, but doing the moves she does in a tiny pair of knickers that barely cover her, is not something i would have let my girls do.

I agree with this post actually.
Gymnastic Tights or stretchy leggings far more appropriate.


And veya etc - just becasue we see it this way doesn't mean we are perverts - it's just that kids do dress inappropriately these days and it's distasteful.

She's a great gymnast though and I could se this becoming an Olympic sport too.

eddie wrote:

risingsun wrote:

Cass wrote:I'm not a pervert thank you - just expressing my opinion.

Perhaps it is because we are the mothers of daughters.  I think she is an amazing gymnast, and in some ways would not have objected to the pole if she wore leggings or tights.   I think the pole has a significance, but doing the moves she does in a tiny pair of knickers that barely cover her, is not something i would have let my girls do.

I agree with this post actually.
Gymnastic Tights or stretchy leggings far more appropriate.


And veya etc - just becasue we see it this way doesn't mean we are perverts - it's just that kids do dress inappropriately these days and it's distasteful.

She's a great gymnast though and I could se this becoming an Olympic sport too.

Ugh! OK, I swear I'm not trying to be an ass (like I do on so many other threads). I realize this is something that bothers some people, and at the same time I don't understand it and it's bothering me that I don't. I'm asking for an explanation as to why this is a bad thing.

Do you worry this is going to mess with a little girl's head, or that ... I don't know, what's the bad here? I simply don't get it. I'm really just asking for you guys to explain this to me in a way I might (fingers crossed) get it. Is it about her personal dignity or something? I'm just guessing at this point and really trying to meet y'all halfway here, because in terms of dignity, I think she's as dignified as a ballerina in this performance.

These views that sexualize the children are formed from the people that think them and are so subjective it is beyond belief. From the extreme view of Muslims believing a person should be covered head to toe, incase they are viewed sexully to some women who view the same of children, not understanding that they are in fact the ones vieiwng them in a sexual manner based off what they are dressed like. You cannot stop the fact there is perverts out there that sexualize children and we should not then make the children feel sexulized themselves based off the subjective view of some parents. Allow them to be who they are, which is children, where there is utterly no harn here in what she wore.

Brasidas wrote:These views that sexualize the children are formed from the people that think them and are so subjective it is beyond belief. From the extreme view of Muslims believing a person should be covered head to toe, incase they are viewed sexully to some women who view the same of children, not understanding that they are in fact the ones vieiwng them in a sexual manner based off what they are dressed like. You cannot stop the fact there is perverts out there that sexualize children and we should not then make the children feel sexulized themselves based off the subjective view of some parents. Allow them to be who they are, which is children, where there is utterly no harn here in what she wore.

I actually think you're onto something. Why should we allow ourselves to be influenced by people who'd view a young child in a sexual way? Isn't that admitting defeat in some sense?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Brasidas wrote:These views that sexualize the children are formed from the people that think them and are so subjective it is beyond belief. From the extreme view of Muslims believing a person should be covered head to toe, incase they are viewed sexully to some women who view the same of children, not understanding that they are in fact the ones vieiwng them in a sexual manner based off what they are dressed like. You cannot stop the fact there is perverts out there that sexualize children and we should not then make the children feel sexulized themselves based off the subjective view of some parents. Allow them to be who they are, which is children, where there is utterly no harn here in what she wore.

I actually think you're onto something. Why should we allow ourselves to be influenced by people who'd view a young child in a sexual way? Isn't that admitting defeat in some sense?

Correct Ben, allow children to be children where here people are making out there is something wrong with how she is dressed based off the view some people will sexualise here, who no matter what she wore would sexualize her anyway, which shows why people fail to see why they make the problem actually far worse.
Allow children to be children and not make that they are wrong because there are sick perverts out there.
The view on how people should dress is people imposing their views onto others, when they should stick to their own children and not interfere how others do.
Again the whole things is subjective and people need to mind their own buisness really as again there was nothing wrong here, except those sexualizing the girl themselves

Ben_Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:

risingsun wrote:

Cass wrote:I'm not a pervert thank you - just expressing my opinion.

Perhaps it is because we are the mothers of daughters.  I think she is an amazing gymnast, and in some ways would not have objected to the pole if she wore leggings or tights.   I think the pole has a significance, but doing the moves she does in a tiny pair of knickers that barely cover her, is not something i would have let my girls do.

I agree with this post actually.
Gymnastic Tights or stretchy leggings far more appropriate.


And veya etc - just becasue we see it this way doesn't mean we are perverts - it's just that kids do dress inappropriately these days and it's distasteful.

She's a great gymnast though and I could se this becoming an Olympic sport too.

Ugh! OK, I swear I'm not trying to be an ass (like I do on so many other threads). I realize this is something that bothers some people, and at the same time I don't understand it and it's bothering me that I don't. I'm asking for an explanation as to why this is a bad thing.

Do you worry this is going to mess with a little girl's head, or that ... I don't know, what's the bad here? I simply don't get it. I'm really just asking for you guys to explain this to me in a way I might (fingers crossed) get it. Is it about her personal dignity or something? I'm just guessing at this point and really trying to meet y'all halfway here, because in terms of dignity, I think she's as dignified as a ballerina in this performance.

I'll explain it really sinply
I dislike kids - as well as adults - wearing so little their Virgina's hang out.

Only time you should be in clothes so few, is in a swimming pool, on a beach or indoors in your underwear.

Put it simply: I make sure my little girl sits with her legs closed as its just polite, decent and proper!!

It has nothing to do with paedohiles. I never said it did.

Fathers of daughters know exactly what I mean.

eddie wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Ugh! OK, I swear I'm not trying to be an ass (like I do on so many other threads). I realize this is something that bothers some people, and at the same time I don't understand it and it's bothering me that I don't. I'm asking for an explanation as to why this is a bad thing.

Do you worry this is going to mess with a little girl's head, or that ... I don't know, what's the bad here? I simply don't get it. I'm really just asking for you guys to explain this to me in a way I might (fingers crossed) get it. Is it about her personal dignity or something? I'm just guessing at this point and really trying to meet y'all halfway here, because in terms of dignity, I think she's as dignified as a ballerina in this performance.

I'll explain it really sinply
I dislike kids - as well as adults - wearing so little their Virgina's hang out.

Only time you should be in clothes so few, is in a swimming pool, on a beach or indoors in your underwear.

Put it simply: I make sure my little girl sits with her legs closed as its just polite, decent and proper!!

It has nothing to do with paedohiles. I never said it did.

Fathers of daughters know exactly what I mean.

Well i do
i had very Victorian minded parents,

Brasidas wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

I actually think you're onto something. Why should we allow ourselves to be influenced by people who'd view a young child in a sexual way? Isn't that admitting defeat in some sense?

Correct Ben, allow children to be children where here people are making out there is something wrong with how she is dressed based off the view some people will sexualise here, who no matter what she wore would sexualize her anyway, which shows why people fail to see why they make the problem actually far worse.
Allow children to be children and not make that they are wrong because there are sick perverts out there.
The view on how people should dress is people imposing their views onto others, when they should stick to their own children and not interfere how others do.
Again the whole things is subjective and people need to mind their own buisness really as again there was nothing wrong here, except those sexualizing the girl themselves

allow children to be children is fine
but some children want to be seen as grown up
hence the totally inappropriate clothes for the age of the  child wearing them parents that allow it should be flogged

Honey Boo Boo as a classic example

korban dallas wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Correct Ben, allow children to be children where here people are making out there is something wrong with how she is dressed based off the view some people will sexualise here, who no matter what she wore would sexualize her anyway, which shows why people fail to see why they make the problem actually far worse.
Allow children to be children and not make that they are wrong because there are sick perverts out there.
The view on how people should dress is people imposing their views onto others, when they should stick to their own children and not interfere how others do.
Again the whole things is subjective and people need to mind their own buisness really as again there was nothing wrong here, except those sexualizing the girl themselves

allow children to be children is fine
but some children want to be seen as grown up
hence the totally inappropriate clothes for the age of the  child wearing them parents that allow it should be flogged

Honey Boo Boo as a classic example

Again that is your subjective point of view as to what is appropiate is it not?
The issue here is people are using the view of sexualization to the point as if what  child wears is going to protect them from this.
It does not and making a child feel they are an issue to what they wear is creating further problems and making a child actually be more adult than they should be. Those castigating here are creating that as again this child just performed and now is wrongly been seen as being sexual based off some parents views.
That is wrong on every level, as she did nothing wrong.
The fact is people are in fact sexulizing the children this way when they should be seen as just children nothing more.
Clothers do not sexulize a child, those viewing them do.

Brasidas wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
allow children to be children is fine
but some children want to be seen as grown up
hence the totally inappropriate clothes for the age of the  child wearing them parents that allow it should be flogged

Honey Boo Boo as a classic example

Again that is your subjective point of view as to what is appropiate is it not?
The issue here is people are using the view of sexualization to the point as if what  child wears is going to protect them from this.
It does not and making a child feel they are an issue to what they wear is creating further problems and making a child actually be more adult than they should be. Those castigating here are creating that as again this child just performed and now is wrongly been seen as being sexual based off some parents views.
That is wrong on every level, as she did nothing wrong.
The fact is people are in fact sexulizing the children this way when they should be seen as just children nothing more.
Clothers do not sexulize a child, those viewing them do.

Yup that is my subjective point of view as to what is appropiate.and nobody is castigating the children

korban dallas wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Again that is your subjective point of view as to what is appropiate is it not?
The issue here is people are using the view of sexualization to the point as if what  child wears is going to protect them from this.
It does not and making a child feel they are an issue to what they wear is creating further problems and making a child actually be more adult than they should be. Those castigating here are creating that as again this child just performed and now is wrongly been seen as being sexual based off some parents views.
That is wrong on every level, as she did nothing wrong.
The fact is people are in fact sexulizing the children this way when they should be seen as just children nothing more.
Clothers do not sexulize a child, those viewing them do.

Yup that is my  subjective point of view as to what is appropiate.and nobody is castigating the children

They most certainly have because they have viewed what she is wearing as wrong, thus making her feel as if she has done wrong, when she never has.
Again what you have to ask yourself is the problem here.
Is it because of what she is wearing is going to make normal people suddenlly sexualize her? Where is she was wearing something different they would not?
She looked fine, the only problem you will have is of those people that no matter what she wears that sexulize her. It does not matter what she wears, they will still sexulize her. She never dressed this way to be viewed sexually and yet some parents are viewing her that way.
So some here are wrongly castigating her off what she wore to perform.
She should be seen as what she is, a child performing, nothing more.

korban dallas wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Again that is your subjective point of view as to what is appropiate is it not?
The issue here is people are using the view of sexualization to the point as if what  child wears is going to protect them from this.
It does not and making a child feel they are an issue to what they wear is creating further problems and making a child actually be more adult than they should be. Those castigating here are creating that as again this child just performed and now is wrongly been seen as being sexual based off some parents views.
That is wrong on every level, as she did nothing wrong.
The fact is people are in fact sexulizing the children this way when they should be seen as just children nothing more.
Clothers do not sexulize a child, those viewing them do.

Yup that is my  subjective point of view as to what is appropiate.and nobody is castigating the children

And a parent's duty is to protect their child in any way them deem appropriate, and to keep in mind all dangers to them.

Brasidas wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
Yup that is my  subjective point of view as to what is appropiate.and nobody is castigating the children

They most certainly have because they have viewed what she is wearing as wrong,i Never said anything like that  thus making her feel as if she has done wrong, when she never has.i also never said that
Again what you have to ask yourself is the problem here.
Is it because of what she is wearing is going to make normal people suddenlly sexualize her? No just the sick fucks as i said Where is she was wearing something different they would not? to the sick fucks it dosnt really make a difference i guess, but i was speaking to ez point about "things" hanging out so to speak
She looked fine, the only problem you will have is of those people that no matter what she wears that sexulize her. It does not matter what she wears, they will still sexulize her. She never dressed this way to be viewed sexually and yet some parents are viewing her that way.

So some here are wrongly castigating her off what she wore to perform.Who not me ? it a leotard don`t all gymnasts where them
the problem is they are form fitting very form fitting on occasions same for the adult ones  and you should not enable a drug user so why enable a deveint

just saying shorts , and a thick top if i had my way that way the perverts are less likely to notice her  

you got kids or a daughter ?
She should be seen as what she is, a child performing, nothing more.

she is by normal people

Protect them from what exactly?
You cannot protect how they are viewed by other people, which is where your view falls down.

Right lets have some real honest here please.
The proposed view here is on what is appropriate.
So let’s look at this as a measure to where do we start from. The private areas being covered I am sure we would all agree on?
Now does anything else need to be covered?
No and here is why, because to view and say it is wrong to wear something is saying a woman has to cover herself because some men sexualize them. You are basically arguing in favour of the most extreme view in Islam where a woman should cover herself head to toe, this being to them the only appropriate clothing to wear. This would be the best form of dress to detract from the vast majority of people sexualizing them an d basically constricting females to be forced to wear something just because some males get turned on. So the argument being made here is based on the same methodology over how appropriate it is for females to dress and more so on children.
The problem is here it is some parents that are sexualizing the children here, because they are just wearing an outfit to perform and nothing more. If flesh being exposed is wrong, then the view point would then be to cover fully up with everyone to protect their bodies being viewed where flesh is exposed, to the point then they should thus wear a Burkha, because this distorts the image of the bodyline. It is some parents making an issue here when none exists


P.S To Korben never claimed you did and I never directly claimed you did, but thanks for your reply it never actually challenged anything I said

Brasidas wrote:Protect them from what exactly?
You cannot protect how they are viewed by other people, which is where your view falls down.

Right lets have some real honest here please.
The proposed view here is on what is appropriate.
So let’s look at this as a measure to where do we start from. The private areas being covered I am sure we would all agree on?
Now does anything else need to be covered?
No and here is why, because to view and say it is wrong to wear something is saying a woman has to cover herself because some men sexualize them. You are basically arguing in favour of the most extreme view in Islam where a woman should cover herself head to toe, this being to them the only appropriate clothing to wear. This would be the best form of dress to detract from the vast majority of people sexualizing them an d basically constricting females to be forced to wear something just because some males get turned on. So the argument being made here is based on the same methodology over how appropriate it is for females to dress and more so on children.
The problem is here it is some parents that are sexualizing the children here, because they are just wearing an outfit to perform and nothing more. If flesh being exposed is wrong, then the view point would then be to cover fully up with everyone to protect their bodies being viewed where flesh is exposed, to the point then they should thus wear a Burkha, because this distorts the image of the bodyline. It is some parents making an issue here when none exists

No kids then because otherwise that statement makes no sense

because the answer "for a parent is "everything"

korban dallas wrote:

Brasidas wrote:Protect them from what exactly?
You cannot protect how they are viewed by other people, which is where your view falls down.

Right lets have some real honest here please.
The proposed view here is on what is appropriate.
So let’s look at this as a measure to where do we start from. The private areas being covered I am sure we would all agree on?
Now does anything else need to be covered?
No and here is why, because to view and say it is wrong to wear something is saying a woman has to cover herself because some men sexualize them. You are basically arguing in favour of the most extreme view in Islam where a woman should cover herself head to toe, this being to them the only appropriate clothing to wear. This would be the best form of dress to detract from the vast majority of people sexualizing them an d basically constricting females to be forced to wear something just because some males get turned on. So the argument being made here is based on the same methodology over how appropriate it is for females to dress and more so on children.
The problem is here it is some parents that are sexualizing the children here, because they are just wearing an outfit to perform and nothing more. If flesh being exposed is wrong, then the view point would then be to cover fully up with everyone to protect their bodies being viewed where flesh is exposed, to the point then they should thus wear a Burkha, because this distorts the image of the bodyline. It is some parents making an issue here when none exists

No kids then because otherwise that statement makes no sense

because the answer "for a parent is "everything"

Your reply made utterly no sense to the point being made, you need to read further than one sentence.

To a parent it is for their own child and not others yet here some parents are making the view on other parents and their child.

Brasidas wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
No kids then because otherwise that statement makes no sense

because the answer "for a parent is "everything"

Your reply made utterly no sense.

To a parent it is for their own child and not others yet here some aprents are making the view on other parents and their child.

LOl i will let the ladys take that
because you obviously have no understanding of what it means to be a parent Jeeze
No wonder your so bitter all the time but your also ok with using the sexual exploitation of children as a weapon against others
so i guess it was to be expected

korban dallas wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Your reply made utterly no sense.

To a parent it is for their own child and not others yet here some aprents are making the view on other parents and their child.

LOl i will let the ladys take that
because you obviously have no understanding of what it means to be a parent Jeeze
No wonder your so bitter all the time but your also ok with using the sexual exploitation of children as a weapon against others
so i guess it was to be expected

Here we go again with poor deflections and claims to the fact I am a parent with 3 daughters, who I do not tell how to dress because they are able to dress how they please as they know themselves what is appropiate.
The fact is I just do not judge other parents on how to dress their own kids, but others are doing so here and where your own first post was correct to now as Sassy differs in her views now your views have changed because you are her lapdog.
The child is only sexulized by those viewing her that way, which includes all those on here making that accusation.
You cannot protect a child from how they are viewed by others, that is an impossiblity.
You really are one sad pathetic lap dog that cannot think for yourself and had to turn the debate nasty as per usual, proving my point that since the pair of you have returned there has been ontold fights.

korban dallas wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Your reply made utterly no sense.

To a parent it is for their own child and not others yet here some aprents are making the view on other parents and their child.

LOl i will let the ladys take that
because you obviously have no understanding of what it means to be a parent Jeeze
No wonder your so bitter all the time but your also ok with using the sexual exploitation of children as a weapon against others
so i guess it was to be expected

Cass, Eddie and I have replied to that one KD as mothers of daughters, doesn't look like any of us like it very much.   And if you can make sense of his last sentence you are a better man than me Gunga Din lol

Brasidas wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
LOl i will let the ladys take that
because you obviously have no understanding of what it means to be a parent Jeeze
No wonder your so bitter all the time but your also ok with using the sexual exploitation of children as a weapon against others
so i guess it was to be expected

Here we go again with poor deflections and claims to the fact I am a parent with 3 daughters, who I do not tell how to dress because they are able to dress how they please as they know themselves what is apporpiate.
The fact is I just do not judge other parents on how to dress their own kids, but others are doing so here and where your own first post was correct to now as Sassy differs in her views now your views have changed because you are her lapdog.
The child is only sexulized by those viewing her that way, which includes all those on here making that accusation.
You cannot protect a child from how they are viewed by others, that is an impossiblity.
You really are one sad pathetic lap dog that cannot think for yourself and had to turn the debate nasty as per usual

parent with 3 daughters then you view is even more perplexing

korban dallas wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Here we go again with poor deflections and claims to the fact I am a parent with 3 daughters, who I do not tell how to dress because they are able to dress how they please as they know themselves what is apporpiate.
The fact is I just do not judge other parents on how to dress their own kids, but others are doing so here and where your own first post was correct to now as Sassy differs in her views now your views have changed because you are her lapdog.
The child is only sexulized by those viewing her that way, which includes all those on here making that accusation.
You cannot protect a child from how they are viewed by others, that is an impossiblity.
You really are one sad pathetic lap dog that cannot think for yourself and had to turn the debate nasty as per usual

parent with 3 daughters then you view is even more perplexing

You are boring me now because as seen you have changed your view on this thread after your initial view to when Sassy posted, that says it all for me you cannot think for yourself
There is nothing wrong with what this child wore, it was a custume for the act, others though have wrongly viewed this as sexual and you have to ponder at why they have when there is nothing wrong with the outfit.

Brasidas wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
parent with 3 daughters then you view is even more perplexing

You are boring me now because as seen you have changed your view on this thread after your initial view to when Sassy posted, that says it all for me you cannot think for yourself
There is nothing wrong with what this child wore, it was a custume for the act, others though have wrongly viewed this as sexual and you have to ponder at why they have when there is nothing wrong with the outfit.

dont confuse boring with the inability to disprove my premise its not your fault
just admit your mistakes and move on Oh and try some parenting classes or is it to late ?

korban dallas wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

You are boring me now because as seen you have changed your view on this thread after your initial view to when Sassy posted, that says it all for me you cannot think for yourself
There is nothing wrong with what this child wore, it was a custume for the act, others though have wrongly viewed this as sexual and you have to ponder at why they have when there is nothing wrong with the outfit.

dont confuse boring with the inability to disprove my premise its not your fault
just admit your mistakes and move on Oh and try some parenting classes or is it to late ?

lol premise?
So you think I have made mistakes by failing to address any of my points, wow that is funny
Really, I am the one that has mapped out the methodology in an idiot free guide for you, where at no point have you adressed my point.
So I will ask you a simple question.
Are you truned on by what this girl is wearing?
Because I am not, so how is it inappropiate if you are not turned on?

Brasidas wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
parent with 3 daughters then you view is even more perplexing

You are boring me now because as seen you have changed your view on this thread after your initial view to when Sassy posted, that says it all for me you cannot think for yourself
There is nothing wrong with what this child wore, it was a custume for the act, others though have wrongly viewed this as sexual and you have to ponder at why they have when there is nothing wrong with the outfit.

A big man did it and ran away basicaly any time sassy agrees with anybody against your view you drag that lame pathetic whine out

i really don`t care  and i suspect nether does she

korban dallas wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

You are boring me now because as seen you have changed your view on this thread after your initial view to when Sassy posted, that says it all for me you cannot think for yourself
There is nothing wrong with what this child wore, it was a custume for the act, others though have wrongly viewed this as sexual and you have to ponder at why they have when there is nothing wrong with the outfit.

A big man did it and ran away basicaly any time sassy agrees with anybody against your view  you drag that lame pathetic whine out

i really don`t care  and i suspect nether does she

The fact is it was both of you making poor comments about me yet again trying to shit stir because this is what you both do, and she is too cowardly to face me in debate and yet talks about me and around me, which is very cowardly.
She knows I can run rings around her view points why she takes the easy option to avoid.
As to you, this was an interesting debate, which you instead decided to turn into the Korben and sassy infant show.
So as far as I am concerned you need to grow some backbone