AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 2010-06-14, 10:09   Link #161
Kaijo
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow, in a house dropped on an ugly, old woman.
Send a message via AIM to Kaijo Send a message via MSN to Kaijo
Quote:
Originally Posted by synaesthetic View Post
Guys, this argument is getting out of hand.

I will repeat my mantra here for all to see and be astounded by:

Correlation is not causation.
And I'm gonna post this in response. ;p

http://xkcd.com/552/

If you're not familiar with xkcd (one of my favorite nerd comics), hover the mouse cursor over the comic for some extra bits. Suggest reading through all of them, as despite the stick figure nature, Randall Monroe is pretty much the Mark Twain of our time.
Kaijo is offline  
Old 2010-06-14, 12:39   Link #162
VVayfarer
Elite Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Northern Europe, Finland, Helsinki
Send a message via ICQ to VVayfarer Send a message via AIM to VVayfarer Send a message via MSN to VVayfarer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
Perhaps you might want to look into *why* psychologist say these activities are bad.
The expert you seem to trust emphasized the fact that Beauty Pageants - as the name implies - are mostly based on beauty. In dancing the skill of the performer takes priority over looks. You should also note that "beauty" in this case doesn't assume anything sexual. As long as the video focused on their dancing skills and not their outfit or looks then it doesn't share the same dynamics as Beauty Pageants; they aren't similar enough to serve as evidence for something.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
Because they are quite similar, and the industries behind them are similar. In both, young children are being molded into adult concepts they cannot mentally comprehend, and with one of them it's already been proven to be detrimental.
These similarities seem superficial at most. Working for the sake of others (quasi-)selflessly could be called an "adult concept a child cannot comprehend" but that hardly makes it undesirable. Since you're probably talking about the so-called sexualization of these children, I'll refer to the article you've twice provided: Beauty Pageants - as the name implies - are mostly about beauty. Dancing - as the word implies - is mostly about dancing skill.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
"Urban dancing" is fairly new, psychologically speaking, so it will take a decade or two before psychologists can analyze how kids have grown and what impact it's had on them. Common sense based on a similar activity should give you a rough idea, however.
Arguments based on common sense have no logical worth.


There was also the argument about the 'Star Wars kid'. His case is, however, completely different from that of these girls. There are many girls involved, they are performing in a professional environment, they're children, they don't share any qualities that are laughable in the case of the SW-kid ('fat nerd's attempt to be cool' might be a subject of ridicule, but it doesn't apply here), and many other - perhaps less important - factors are completely different. The similarities end at "video of the person/people posted on the internet", which cover's a whole lot of children doing completely 'normal' things that might become subject to ridicule.
__________________
VVayfarer is offline  
Old 2010-06-14, 13:35   Link #163
Kaijo
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow, in a house dropped on an ugly, old woman.
Send a message via AIM to Kaijo Send a message via MSN to Kaijo
Quote:
Originally Posted by VVayfarer View Post
The expert you seem to trust emphasized the fact that Beauty Pageants - as the name implies - are mostly based on beauty. In dancing the skill of the performer takes priority over looks. You should also note that "beauty" in this case doesn't assume anything sexual. As long as the video focused on their dancing skills and not their outfit or looks then it doesn't share the same dynamics as Beauty Pageants; they aren't similar enough to serve as evidence for something.
Beauty and skills are varying factors in each. Indeed, many beauty pageants do have dance components. What defines them is that, yes, beauty is usually more emphasized in pageants, and dance skills in urban dancing. Neither exists in a vacuum, though, and the history of human dance showcases many costumes which are meant to add to the overall effect, and evoke certain emotional responses in the watchers.

Dance isn't just about moving your body, but the overall package.

While no analogy is perfect, they are more alike than you give credit for. Tell me how popular a group of fat, ugly women dancing around will be, and you'll get my point. One interesting thing I learned was that Beyonce's back-up dancers for when she did the song, wore more clothing than these girls. What possible message could be sent by having the little girls wear less?

Quote:
These similarities seem superficial at most. Working for the sake of others (quasi-)selflessly could be called an "adult concept a child cannot comprehend" but that hardly makes it undesirable. Since you're probably talking about the so-called sexualization of these children, I'll refer to the article you've twice provided: Beauty Pageants - as the name implies - are mostly about beauty. Dancing - as the word implies - is mostly about dancing skill.
Your points do not address the sexuality, though. If I showed you a picture of a young girl in a summer dress and wide-brimmed hat holding a flower and smiling, you'd probably say it was "pretty" or "cute." If the same girl was wearing skimpy lingerie and laying on her side, one leg curved just so and giving a suggestive look? You'd rightly say that she was attempting to be sexual.

Why these are adult concepts, is because young kids are fundamentally unable to really grasp the full concept of sex until puberty. In both cases, people are pushing young girls into areas that they won't understand. I brought up the earlier point about what if the girls were wearing skimpy lingerie and pole dancing suggestively? It would still take skill, but you'd have to agree that they were being blatantly sexual.

What these girls were doing was one small step away from that, which borders on pedophilia. Why is pedophilia wrong again?

Quote:
Arguments based on common sense have no logical worth.
Yes and no. Common sense is a decent starting point for a rough idea, then you can delve deeper to find out why that is. Quite often, common sense is distilled wisdom in sound bites, with good underlying reasons, such as not playing with a loaded gun.

Quote:
There was also the argument about the 'Star Wars kid'. His case is, however, completely different from that of these girls. There are many girls involved, they are performing in a professional environment, they're children, they don't share any qualities that are laughable in the case of the SW-kid ('fat nerd's attempt to be cool' might be a subject of ridicule, but it doesn't apply here), and many other - perhaps less important - factors are completely different. The similarities end at "video of the person/people posted on the internet", which cover's a whole lot of children doing completely 'normal' things that might become subject to ridicule.
For the point being made, they are accurate enough: a video going viral which has a profound effect on the person's life. For the girls, that will come later. But who cares what possible effects they could have, right? Let's just do this and and if the girls have issues later, well, who cares? We're running a contest and we want to win. Or we're putting on a demonstration which will help bring more money into our dance studio. Money and winning are worth the possible negatives to our children, right?

Just to be clear, not against kids dancing (which I do think is better than beauty pageants); just that there are plenty of dances which don't pretend to be blatantly sexual. The very fact we're having this argument and that the internet seems to be conflicted, proves there is an issue.
Kaijo is offline  
Old 2010-06-14, 14:51   Link #164
VVayfarer
Elite Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Northern Europe, Finland, Helsinki
Send a message via ICQ to VVayfarer Send a message via AIM to VVayfarer Send a message via MSN to VVayfarer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
Beauty and skills are varying factors in each. Indeed, many beauty pageants do have dance components. What defines them is that, yes, beauty is usually more emphasized in pageants, and dance skills in urban dancing. Neither exists in a vacuum, though, and the history of human dance showcases many costumes which are meant to add to the overall effect, and evoke certain emotional responses in the watchers.

Dance isn't just about moving your body, but the overall package.
That's the point - in dance, beauty is secondary. According to the expert you linked to, the main point against Beauty Pageants is that they're more or less all about beauty, which results in the participants becoming overly conscious about things regarding beauty. Dancing puts the biggest emphasis on dancing ability, even if looks and the like remain important. Thus the 'harmfulness' of the video and the circumstances surrounding it becomes doubtful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
One interesting thing I learned was that Beyonce's back-up dancers for when she did the song, wore more clothing than these girls. What possible message could be sent by having the little girls wear less?
There might not be any logical justification for such, at least a solid one. The opposite is also true - it doesn't seem logical to condemn it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
What these girls were doing was one small step away from that, which borders on pedophilia. Why is pedophilia wrong again?
Pedophilia is (in simplified terms) sexual attraction towards prepubescent children, so I assume you're talking about child porn. Your question might have been rhetorical, but I'll answer anyway: I believe CP is said to be 'wrong' due to children being exploited, due to it being harmful to their development and due to it 'encouraging' child molestation. Public (moralistic) contempt is also a major reason.

When watching the video without major preconceptions, all the girls are doing is dancing. They might be exploited, but that could apply to many 'non-sexual' (for a lack of a better term) prepubescent performers. They could be exploited in many different ways, but unlike with CP, in this case it isn't obvious nor should it be assumed by default.

Whether this is harmful to their development is also debatable, as stated above. Same goes for the 'encouragement of child molestation' aspect. In the light of these facts, the similarity between CP and the video and the circumstances surrounding is dependent on baseless preconceptions, which - by themselves - hold no logical value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
Yes and no. Common sense is a decent starting point for a rough idea, then you can delve deeper to find out why that is. Quite often, common sense is distilled wisdom in sound bites, with good underlying reasons, such as not playing with a loaded gun.
Common sense might have practical value, but when forming an argument, common sense should be left aside. It is often based on far too many flawed preconceptions that, while practical or even seemingly logical, are incompatible with logic that assumes neutral ways of perceiving the subjects involved.

Having said that, it's not like 'common sense' is an unequivocal concept - everyone can have their own interpretation of it. That too contributes to the argument that common sense is prone to being based on flawed assumptions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
For the point being made, they are accurate enough: a video going viral which has a profound effect on the person's life. For the girls, that will come later. But who cares what possible effects they could have, right? Let's just do this and and if the girls have issues later, well, who cares? We're running a contest and we want to win. Or we're putting on a demonstration which will help bring more money into our dance studio. Money and winning are worth the possible negatives to our children, right?
The dynamics are still completely different. I admit that they share a superficial tie, but that's all there is. The reasons being mostly as follows:

The girls where in a group, which leads to diversification of attention. There isn't only one person to 'laugh at' or bully if people are to do such. The girls are children - by the time they're likely to be bullied for something like this, it will be buried within the past, assuming they haven't done this up until that day. Even if they had, it might really not affect them - being a 'sexualized' dancer might not be all that bad for a teen, compared to being a 'fat nerd trying to be cool' or however people view the SW-kid. Being in a professional environment might lead to a career outside school, which - while perhaps not an ideal situation in itself - could save them from serious bullying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
Just to be clear, not against kids dancing (which I do think is better than beauty pageants); just that there are plenty of dances which don't pretend to be blatantly sexual. The very fact we're having this argument and that the internet seems to be conflicted, proves there is an issue.
The internet being conflicted over something and people arguing about non-issues are common enough, though. Not really proof in themselves.
__________________

Last edited by VVayfarer; 2010-06-15 at 03:25. Reason: Major typo
VVayfarer is offline  
Old 2010-06-14, 18:54   Link #165
0utf0xZer0
Pretentious moe scholar
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
You're halfway there, take it to it's logical conclusion. If dressing like a "slut" (even Beyonce's backup dancers wore more clothing!) damages a child's self-esteem, then moving like one does as well. And I only use the term "slut" for lack of a better one. With dancing, not only are the girls learning that what matters is their looks, it's how they move as well. They have to look and act sexy, because that's the only thing that matters for a woman to be liked.
I'm going to quote one of Mystique's posts here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystique View Post
Personally the lyrics on the tune are nothing but to sing about superficially, dance with the beat and mimic dance and have fun.
I doubt many kids will dig into the meaning and use it in the way adults will either, they'd probably go 'I just like the tune', I sure as hell didn't think much about the lyrics of Madonna's 'like a Virgin', or Salt and Peppers 'let's talk about sex' or 'push it', save to giggle, sing and dance with it.

The Spice girls of the 90's, what I grew up on tried their own brand of 'girl power' messages.
I heard their lyrics, we sang them, we did the dances and then forgot about it.
So to me, if we're going to say that this sort of thing is harmful to girls, the question that needs to be answered is what separates the experience of someone like Mystique, for whom the sexuality involved wasn't important, from what these girls are doing?

The logical conclusion to me is that it's the outfits. And as Mystique also pointed out earlier, the outfits distracted from what should have been the real story of the video: that those girls are really really good. I'm no expert on dance and I could tell that.

(Since I am not a dance expert, it is, of course, entirely possible that I'm not aware of how sexy the moves they were using are supposed to be. I'm not a pedo and find eight year olds in skimpy outfits boner retardant, so I'm not the kind of person who would have spotted what was supposed to be sexy.)
__________________

Signature courtesy of Ganbaru.
0utf0xZer0 is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 10:34   Link #166
Kaijo
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow, in a house dropped on an ugly, old woman.
Send a message via AIM to Kaijo Send a message via MSN to Kaijo
Quote:
Originally Posted by VVayfarer View Post
That's the point - in dance, beauty is secondary. According to the expert you linked to, the main point against Beauty Pageants is that they're more or less all about beauty, which results in the participants becoming overly conscious about things regarding beauty. Dancing puts the biggest emphasis on dancing ability, even if looks and the like remain important. Thus the 'harmfulness' of the video and the circumstances surrounding it becomes doubtful.
A lot of child beauty pageants also have the swimsuit competition. How do you feel about that? Parading a bunch of young girls up in sexy swimsuits? Because outfits do attract attention; but is it the right kind of attention you want to be directing at children?

Quote:
Pedophilia is (in simplified terms) sexual attraction towards prepubescent children, so I assume you're talking about child porn. Your question might have been rhetorical, but I'll answer anyway: I believe CP is said to be 'wrong' due to children being exploited, due to it being harmful to their development and due to it 'encouraging' child molestation. Public (moralistic) contempt is also a major reason.
Thank you for not dancing around the issue and answering honestly. You hit the nail on the head with the bolded parts. Even if you don't think these girls are being exploited, we already know that some things are harmful to their development; my biggest beef is that people are putting girls up like this, without even thinking that there might be issues for them down the road. Shoot first, ask questions later. At one time, no one thought child beauty pageants were a bad thing, either. Why so against the idea that sexualizing children in a dance might just be bad for their development?

As for the last point, if you are a pedophile, and want to see sexy young girls, where are you going to go? And once you see these girls when you get there, you think you just might want one of them? Sexualizing your child and putting them on display just might not be the safest and wisest course. Especially considering the slippery slope this could lead to; the lap and pole dance performances I mentioned before.

Why? Because shock value works. The next group is going to have to go further down the line to get a response. If we're going to draw a line in the sand, I'd say anything sexual is off limits; that includes clothing and song choices. You can showcase a young girl's talent with so many other songs and outfits.

Quote:
When watching the video without major preconceptions, all the girls are doing is dancing. They might be exploited, but that could apply to many 'non-sexual' (for a lack of a better term) prepubescent performers. They could be exploited in many different ways, but unlike with CP, in this case it isn't obvious nor should it be assumed by default.
The problem is that everyone comes with preconceptions. I, myself, from a logical point of view don't have an initial problem with it as far as my own self is concerned. But I have to consider other people, including the health and well-being of the children involved, and that's where the issue lies, because not everyone thinks like me.

Like I said, the only reason people are talking about this, is because everyone knows the outfits were designed to elicit sex appeal. If you really want to argue against this, suggest that your mom, sister, or girlfriend go out in public wearing the same thing. You know they are going to attract stares, and you know exactly why. You can try to pass it off as "oh, it's other people's preconceived notions" but as individuals, we do not exist in a vacuum.

Quote:
Whether this is harmful to their development is also debatable, as stated above. Same goes for the 'encouragement of child molestation' aspect. In the light of these facts, the similarity between CP and the video and the circumstances surrounding is dependent on baseless preconceptions, which - by themselves - hold no logical value.
When we have verifiable proof that things like CP and beauty pageants harm children due to sexualizing of them, and we know the outfits were designed to elicit sex appeal, then we have a suggestive correlation that merits further study. To do otherwise, is to blatantly turn a blind eye to truths we do not wish to see. And as a scientist, I am forever seeking the truth, no matter how uncomfortable it may make me. I'm used to having my beliefs challenged daily, and realigning my thinking based on new data.

Quote:
The girls where in a group, which leads to diversification of attention. There isn't only one person to 'laugh at' or bully if people are to do such. The girls are children - by the time they're likely to be bullied for something like this, it will be buried within the past, assuming they haven't done this up until that day. Even if they had, it might really not affect them - being a 'sexualized' dancer might not be all that bad for a teen, compared to being a 'fat nerd trying to be cool' or however people view the SW-kid. Being in a professional environment might lead to a career outside school, which - while perhaps not an ideal situation in itself - could save them from serious bullying.
Maybe, maybe not. You're stating assumptions without any facts. I try not to do that, and let my assumptions derive from evidence of things we already know; hence, why I post links and sources to my evidence. My mind can be changed, but only when stronger evidence is presented. Forming an opinion without much to back it up is dangerous, especially with the well-being of children on the line. I'm not one to gamble on a kid's health when I don't have to, but I recognize other people may feel differently.

So what is so compelling that you would risk a kid's mental health by defending this? We know a lot about what harms kids, and logical deduction based on that, leans toward this not exactly being a good thing. Could be wrong, of course, but I don't see evidence for why we should dress kids up in sexy clothes and parade them around. What is the logical reason and evidence for letting kids go down that road? Because it's not gonna stop at this.
Kaijo is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 12:07   Link #167
Nogitsune
Shameless Fangirl
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
As for the last point, if you are a pedophile, and want to see sexy young girls, where are you going to go? And once you see these girls when you get there, you think you just might want one of them? Sexualizing your child and putting them on display just might not be the safest and wisest course. Especially considering the slippery slope this could lead to; the lap and pole dance performances I mentioned before.
There is absolutely no proof that the majority of pedophiles would go for "sexy" looking children rather than "innocent" looking ones. This is much like the claim that if you wear mini-skirts, you should expect to be raped; it's nothing more than victimg-blaming.

You might as well say that putting your children anywhere people can see them is an irresponsible thing to do, especially since in most cases, it's not strangers that are the problem, but "familiar adults".
__________________
"I think of the disturbance in Area 11 as a chess puzzle, set forth by Lelouch." - Clovis la Britannia
Nogitsune is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 14:21   Link #168
Lord of Fire
The Voice of Reason
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Age: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
A lot of child beauty pageants also have the swimsuit competition. How do you feel about that? Parading a bunch of young girls up in sexy swimsuits? Because outfits do attract attention; but is it the right kind of attention you want to be directing at children?
Why are you placing emphasis on 'sexy'? If they're wearing swimsuits, they could be doing it because they're ready to go swimming. And even if the child is a swimsuit model, why should we care?

Quote:
Thank you for not dancing around the issue and answering honestly. You hit the nail on the head with the bolded parts. Even if you don't think these girls are being exploited, we already know that some things are harmful to their development; my biggest beef is that people are putting girls up like this, without even thinking that there might be issues for them down the road. Shoot first, ask questions later. At one time, no one thought child beauty pageants were a bad thing, either. Why so against the idea that sexualizing children in a dance might just be bad for their development?
Because there is no evidence that they are, else you could claim that all those child singers/dancers in Japan are being sexually exploited. And even if there are children being abused, why not look into ways for making it safer for them, rather than raise a stink of it, with all consequences attached to it?

Quote:
As for the last point, if you are a pedophile, and want to see sexy young girls, where are you going to go?
Pedophiles do not need to see children in 'sexy' outfits to be sexually attracted to them. Seeing a little girl in a cute dress works just as well for them. They could pluck a random young girl off the streets for all they care.

Quote:
And once you see these girls when you get there, you think you just might want one of them? Sexualizing your child and putting them on display just might not be the safest and wisest course. Especially considering the slippery slope this could lead to; the lap and pole dance performances I mentioned before.
You're thinking too deeply into this. Maybe some child dancers are being abused, get depressions or whatever, but again, I'm sure the large majority do not. Maybe that's the case for beauty contests, but this is different and, IMO, by far not totally comparable.

Quote:
Why? Because shock value works. The next group is going to have to go further down the line to get a response. If we're going to draw a line in the sand, I'd say anything sexual is off limits; that includes clothing and song choices. You can showcase a young girl's talent with so many other songs and outfits.
Who defines what is 'sexual', though? Last I checked, each person has his own perception of what is sexy and what is not. A child winking and blowing kisses can be seen as sexual, even if she would be 'properly' clothed, but a lot of people may just find that 'cute' and 'charming'.

Also, in earlier times, children could pose in underwear for mail order catalogs, and no one seemed to have a problem with that, because they did it to show off said underwear and no sexual undertone was implied. So why do we such a problem with it now?

Quote:
The problem is that everyone comes with preconceptions. I, myself, from a logical point of view don't have an initial problem with it as far as my own self is concerned. But I have to consider other people, including the health and well-being of the children involved, and that's where the issue lies, because not everyone thinks like me.
I myself don't care about what others think. It's not of my concern, as long as it doesn't directly involve me. Plus, people tend to be influenced by other people, especially if some of those claim to know what they're talking about and without cold, hard facts, you can never tell who is truly right.

Quote:
Like I said, the only reason people are talking about this, is because everyone knows the outfits were designed to elicit sex appeal.
Majority =/= everyone.

Quote:
If you really want to argue against this, suggest that your mom, sister, or girlfriend go out in public wearing the same thing. You know they are going to attract stares, and you know exactly why. You can try to pass it off as "oh, it's other people's preconceived notions" but as individuals, we do not exist in a vacuum.
What others think of it is their problem, not ours. The only problem I have with it is the other type of 'slippery slope' you mentioned: that we become overprotective and restrict or even ban certain events or clothing, just because of a (largely) unfounded fear that children (or adults alike) are being abused of forced into doing that and/or that they encourage sexual behavior from others towards them.

Quote:
When we have verifiable proof that things like CP and beauty pageants harm children due to sexualizing of them, and we know the outfits were designed to elicit sex appeal, then we have a suggestive correlation that merits further study.
I'd encourage more study, but there are a few problems: 1 - it usually has legal ramifications (ex: you can't just put a child and an adult together and let them have sex, even not if the intent is for scientific purposes only) and are thus terribly one-sided, 2 - any approved study isn't to disprove the critics, but to prove that the ruling statement is correct (hence why I said you can't always trust the 'experts') and 3 - even if the study proved the exact opposite of what is accepted, you'll have a lot of people who will outright refuse to believe it, because they've been hardwired into thinking that the conclusion can't be anything else than what they believe to be true (we're already seeing that with the current "Climate Change is caused by man" debate – any study that proves otherwise is ignored or dismissed as 'faulty' by many).

Quote:
To do otherwise, is to blatantly turn a blind eye to truths we do not wish to see. And as a scientist, I am forever seeking the truth, no matter how uncomfortable it may make me. I'm used to having my beliefs challenged daily, and realigning my thinking based on new data.
A true scientist is open to both sides of the discussion, because he knows that his theory might not be (completely) true. Yet, you seem quite hard-pressed to believe that these children are being (sexually) exploited, when there is no concrete evidence that they indeed are. What's even worse, you seek evidence in the wrong field and link that to this one, when the two don't really overlap as much as you think.

Quote:
Maybe, maybe not. You're stating assumptions without any facts. I try not to do that, and let my assumptions derive from evidence of things we already know; hence, why I post links and sources to my evidence. My mind can be changed, but only when stronger evidence is presented. Forming an opinion without much to back it up is dangerous, especially with the well-being of children on the line. I'm not one to gamble on a kid's health when I don't have to, but I recognize other people may feel differently.
Funny how I see you do just that then – form opinions without the proper facts to back them up. You claim to be open to anything, yet you appear terribly closed-minded regarding this. Just because it involves children, doesn't mean it deserves special attention.

Quote:
So what is so compelling that you would risk a kid's mental health by defending this? We know a lot about what harms kids, and logical deduction based on that, leans toward this not exactly being a good thing. Could be wrong, of course, but I don't see evidence for why we should dress kids up in sexy clothes and parade them around. What is the logical reason and evidence for letting kids go down that road? Because it's not gonna stop at this.
Parents can harm kids too, and a lot of them do. Heck, they're the largest group of child abusers, yet, I don't see authorities separating kids from their parents, because they fear they might harm then. So why do we fear others doing that so much? If the parent has no problem with their children dressing up like this, it should NOT be up to us to decide for them that they made the wrong decisions. If people find that a reason to do said child harm, punish the person who does so, because he's the only one who did something wrong.
__________________
Lord of Fire is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 14:30   Link #169
Kaijo
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow, in a house dropped on an ugly, old woman.
Send a message via AIM to Kaijo Send a message via MSN to Kaijo
[QUOTE=Nogitsune;3092955]There is absolutely no proof that the majority of pedophiles would go for "sexy" looking children rather than "innocent" looking ones. This is much like the claim that if you wear mini-skirts, you should expect to be raped; it's nothing more than victimg-blaming.

This rings of some truth, but there are common sense behaviors you can engage in. For instance, it's wrong to blame a the woman for being raped against her will... but how smart was it to dress up in sexy clothes and walk through dark alleys alone? How smart is it to be flirty with a guy you have no intention of doing anything with, but that you *know* is dangerous and has a habit of getting what he wants? How smart is it to wrap yourself in bloody steaks and jump into a lion's den?

There are things you can do to reduce risk to yourself, and people under your charge.

Quote:
You might as well say that putting your children anywhere people can see them is an irresponsible thing to do, especially since in most cases, it's not strangers that are the problem, but "familiar adults".
Yes, generally abuse happens most frequently by people the child knows... like, say, the dance contest organizers, who encourage parents to let their children wear less and less clothing. And perhaps take some of the children aside for special lessons. Which ones, though? Perhaps the ones most eager to please by wearing revealing outfits?

No, it's not a large risk, but if you display a large ham to enough animals, one of them is gonna bite. However, this isn't my main point; it's just one more added risk, one that doesn't need to be taken at all except for shock value.

Edit, since Lord of Fire posteed:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of Fire View Post
Why are you placing emphasis on 'sexy'? If they're wearing swimsuits, they could be doing it because they're ready to go swimming. And even if the child is a swimsuit model, why should we care?
I'm sorry, but you can't be this naive? Think about it for a second; why do they have swimsuit competitions in adult beauty pageants? And tell me with a straight face that they aren't going for something similar with children. Because we are talking about how clothing is designed to elicit a certain response in the viewer, and they are deliberately making a correlation.

Quote:
Who defines what is 'sexual', though? Last I checked, each person has his own perception of what is sexy and what is not. A child winking and blowing kisses can be seen as sexual, even if she would be 'properly' clothed, but a lot of people may just find that 'cute' and 'charming'.
You're trying to confuse the issue. People in the US do have similar notions of what can be construed as someone attempting to be sexy, as far as the US is concerned. Yes, African tribes have a different notion, but we're not talking about dancing in African tribes. Thus, we very well can define what is sexual in the US, by the standards of US culture. To pretend otherwise, is to be disingenuous.

Quote:
Also, in earlier times, children could pose in underwear for mail order catalogs, and no one seemed to have a problem with that, because they did it to show off said underwear and no sexual undertone was implied. So why do we such a problem with it now?
Culture changed. Why is that? We, as a society, determined its not right, for the mental well-being of our kids. We also used to promote the health benefits of radium. Why do we have a problem soaking in radium-infused baths now? Because they were proven to be harmful by science.

I myself don't care about what others think. It's not of my concern, as long as it doesn't directly involve me. Plus, people tend to be influenced by other people, especially if some of those claim to know what they're talking about and without cold, hard facts, you can never tell who is truly right.

Quote:
Majority =/= everyone.
Here's an experiment for you to run. Just walk into a busy park, find a nice open place in the middle of the grass, and take a leak right there. If the majority is offended, who cares? Not everyone is. What? You're under arrest for doing something that the majority don't want you to do?

Majority may not be everyone, but if you want to live in a society, you quickly learn that they do have some importance.

Quote:
What others think of it is their problem, not ours. The only problem I have with it is the other type of 'slippery slope' you mentioned: that we become overprotective and restrict or even ban certain events or clothing, just because of a (largely) unfounded fear that children (or adults alike) are being abused of forced into doing that and/or that they encourage sexual behavior from others towards them.
It's our job as adults to restrict children. It's our responsibility (well, the parents, but society has determined that it can take that right away from a parent if it deems it in the best interests of the child). Sure, when they get old enough to understand the consequences to their actions they are more free to do as they like. But not before. It's our job to safeguard the mental and physical health of the child until then, while teaching them about the world.

Quote:
A true scientist is open to both sides of the discussion, because he knows that his theory might not be (completely) true. Yet, you seem quite hard-pressed to believe that these children are being (sexually) exploited, when there is no concrete evidence that they indeed are. What's even worse, you seek evidence in the wrong field and link that to this one, when the two don't really overlap as much as you think.
"Teach the controversy" eh? Even when there really is none in the scientific community? That's how people are trying to cram creationism into schools as Intelligent Design, when science is going with evolution. But this is getting off topic.

Quote:
Funny how I see you do just that then – form opinions without the proper facts to back them up. You claim to be open to anything, yet you appear terribly closed-minded regarding this. Just because it involves children, doesn't mean it deserves special attention.
I posted tons of links earlier in the thread. I have yet to see any from you. I wouldn't be talking about scorecards at this point. A good scientist is skeptical until given evidence; do not confuse that with close-mindedness, when I know you're better than that. When you have some evidence to present, I'll start taking it into consideration.

Quote:
Parents can harm kids too, and a lot of them do. Heck, they're the largest group of child abusers, yet, I don't see authorities separating kids from their parents, because they fear they might harm then. So why do we fear others doing that so much? If the parent has no problem with their children dressing up like this, it should NOT be up to us to decide for them that they made the wrong decisions. If people find that a reason to do said child harm, punish the person who does so, because he's the only one who did something wrong.
Heh, we already do take kids away from parents if we suspect they are harming, or could harm them. Not the best argument to make.

Beauty pageants are harmful to kids because of the attention that they must look and act a certain attractive way to be a "winner." This has led people abusing their children more and more in order to win; it's fairly wide-spread.

Urban dancing is relatively new, but like this particular video showcases, kids are being taught that they must look and act a certain attractive way to be a "winner." Based on history, we can make an educated guess as to what is happening. In fact, we already know. Based on my limited research into the topic, this video isn't the worst of it; there are much, much worse out there. And it's standard. So you have to ask yourself if you're really ready to see the truth behind this, because it is real. If you aren't, then stop here, and continue on confident in your knowledge that you don't know if it's worse or not.

Last edited by Kaijo; 2010-06-15 at 14:55.
Kaijo is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 14:41   Link #170
VVayfarer
Elite Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Northern Europe, Finland, Helsinki
Send a message via ICQ to VVayfarer Send a message via AIM to VVayfarer Send a message via MSN to VVayfarer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
A lot of child beauty pageants also have the swimsuit competition. How do you feel about that? Parading a bunch of young girls up in sexy swimsuits? Because outfits do attract attention; but is it the right kind of attention you want to be directing at children?
It is one ‘stupid’ (for the lack of a better term) deed by parents amidst others. It probably doesn't contribute to a child’s development, and it seems like waste of time at best. That’s just another form of Beauty Pageants, though, and doesn’t have all that much to do with the dancers and the video. Indeed, both ‘sexualize’ the children involved, but one focuses mainly on looks while the other on skill. On top of that, the expert you linked to stated that Beauty Pageants are harmful in general, whether it involved swimsuits or not.

You're probably referring to unwanted and possibly dangerous attention by pedophiles - I'll come to that later in this post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
Thank you for not dancing around the issue and answering honestly. You hit the nail on the head with the bolded parts. Even if you don't think these girls are being exploited, we already know that some things are harmful to their development; my biggest beef is that people are putting girls up like this, without even thinking that there might be issues for them down the road. Shoot first, ask questions later. At one time, no one thought child beauty pageants were a bad thing, either. Why so against the idea that sexualizing children in a dance might just be bad for their development?
I’ll emphasize the bolded part. Now we know (Or ‘know’ as long as the expert you linked to is right. Even if he’s trustworthy, the majority of experts can always be wrong, especially since the type of psychology we’re talking about is often recognized as ‘soft science’), but that doesn’t mean that BPs should have been condemned before the ‘fact’ came to light – without evidence it would merely be illogical moralism.

Speaking from the ‘cold logic’ point of view, as long as studies haven’t proven the harmfulness of this ‘sexualization’, it should be left as it is even if it is very harmful in reality. Ignorance can be cured by science. All kinds of precautions can be taken, of course, but if we don’t ‘know’ it to be harmful, then we shouldn’t assume it is and act accordingly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
As for the last point, if you are a pedophile, and want to see sexy young girls, where are you going to go? And once you see these girls when you get there, you think you just might want one of them? Sexualizing your child and putting them on display just might not be the safest and wisest course. Especially considering the slippery slope this could lead to; the lap and pole dance performances I mentioned before.
The first part is a distinct possibility. It is conjecture, though, and has its weaknesses. It can be ‘countered’ with conjecture from the other side. Let me give you an example: The girls are probably more difficult targets than children going to school and the like, resulting from their guardians knowing that pedophiles might be turned on by them. Adding to this a pedophile that believes they’ll have a higher chance if they try to kidnap someone else, the dancers might very well be safer than average children. This is of course baseless conjecture, but still a distinct possibility, and hence usable as ‘counter-conjecture’.

To the latter part: It might not be the wisest choice, but the choice should exist as long as it isn’t visibly more harmful than useful; since children are involved the choice might preferably be nullified if this ratio becomes negative – in other words, if the object of debate is more harmful than not. Further studies should shed some light on this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
Why? Because shock value works. The next group is going to have to go further down the line to get a response. If we're going to draw a line in the sand, I'd say anything sexual is off limits; that includes clothing and song choices. You can showcase a young girl's talent with so many other songs and outfits.
Limiting freedom of choice should never be taken lightly. As long as the children aren’t known to be harmed by sexualization of this degree, the prospect of outlawing it can only get moralistic support, fueled by ‘common sense’. Also, while this might become a slippery slope, this also might stop here. Even the business world has a tendency to stop at 'grey areas' of morals, since it is after all the public who ultimately pays for their goods and services. If sexualization of children of this degree is what is deemed as 'the gray area' - which might very well be since 'lap dancing' and the like are already in the prosecutable zone
- the slippery slope won't happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
Like I said, the only reason people are talking about this, is because everyone knows the outfits were designed to elicit sex appeal. If you really want to argue against this, suggest that your mom, sister, or girlfriend go out in public wearing the same thing. You know they are going to attract stares, and you know exactly why. You can try to pass it off as "oh, it's other people's preconceived notions" but as individuals, we do not exist in a vacuum.
I have no objections to the ‘sex appeal’ part, that much could be considered a given. How harmful or not this sexualization is, is another matter. In the (apparent) absence of solid evidence regarding that, the video and the related circumstances cannot be considered similar to child porn.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
When we have verifiable proof that things like CP and beauty pageants harm children due to sexualizing of them, and we know the outfits were designed to elicit sex appeal, then we have a suggestive correlation that merits further study. To do otherwise, is to blatantly turn a blind eye to truths we do not wish to see. And as a scientist, I am forever seeking the truth, no matter how uncomfortable it may make me. I'm used to having my beliefs challenged daily, and realigning my thinking based on new data.
As far as I understand, we agree on this – without further study, condemning or attempting to justify the object of debate is meaningless. Simply believing something is right or wrong based on marginal evidence doesn’t make it logical to encourage/discourage that something or things related to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
Maybe, maybe not. You're stating assumptions without any facts. I try not to do that, and let my assumptions derive from evidence of things we already know; hence, why I post links and sources to my evidence. My mind can be changed, but only when stronger evidence is presented. Forming an opinion without much to back it up is dangerous, especially with the well-being of children on the line. I'm not one to gamble on a kid's health when I don't have to, but I recognize other people may feel differently.
Apparently the part preceding that which you quoted was too ambiguous – My point was to prove the conclusive differences between the SW-kid’s and the girls’ cases by demonstration of the extent of the change possibly made by the different factors. As far as I can see, the aforementioned examples were impossible or much more improbable in the SW-kid’s case, and thus usable as proof.

On another note, let me quote what you stated earlier:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
For the point being made, they are accurate enough: a video going viral which has a profound effect on the person's life. For the girls, that will come later.
With all due respect, I fail to find any solid evidence supporting this. In light of this, it seems fairly hypocritical to state “you are making assumptions without any facts, I try not to do that"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
So what is so compelling that you would risk a kid's mental health by defending this? We know a lot about what harms kids, and logical deduction based on that, leans toward this not exactly being a good thing. Could be wrong, of course, but I don't see evidence for why we should dress kids up in sexy clothes and parade them around. What is the logical reason and evidence for letting kids go down that road? Because it's not gonna stop at this.
As I stated in the previous post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by VVayfarer View Post
There might not be any logical justification for such, at least a solid one. The opposite is also true - it doesn't seem logical to condemn it.
There is no reason to stop things from happening only because of a possibly negative harmfulness/usefulness-ratio, established with a mixture of guesswork and proof. Having concrete evidence is another matter.
__________________
VVayfarer is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 15:05   Link #171
Kaijo
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow, in a house dropped on an ugly, old woman.
Send a message via AIM to Kaijo Send a message via MSN to Kaijo
I'm just gonna respost this even-handed article for people to re-read. It's one of the few I could find with a more balanced look at the urban dancing scene:

http://artsblog.freedomblogging.com/...oo-sexy/30475/

In case you don't click, I'm gonna repost a few sections from the guy investigating this:

"To me, this style of dance is undoubtedly too risqué for kids this age. But Dance Precision’s girls are by no means unique in their transgression. The world of urban dance is both competitive and popular; other teachers are guilty of allowing their students to perform sexualized material at too young an age, simply to make a big impression at competitions."

“This (dance routine) isn’t something I would feel comfortable with in my classroom or on a public stage, especially for girls this age,” said Jennifer Backhaus, who teaches dance at Chapman University and runs her own modern dance company. “But this is a different world from the one I’m in. There are different expectations and pressures.”

“I see it more and more,” said Festival Ballet artistic director Salwa Rizkalla from her studio in Fountain Valley. “This style of dance isn’t part of the (ballet) aesthetic, of course, and I would never allow it. But many young girls are being exposed to it now.”


"But when I tried to get a dance teacher to make a similar defense of Dance Precisions on the record, I struck out time and again. (Dance Precision’s owners refused my requests for comment – they were clearly shaken by the controversy when I talked to them.)

A seasoned commercial choreographer who requested anonymity summed it up for me. “This is a big, lucrative part of the dance scene, and some of my friends teach girls in schools like Dance Precisions. There’s too much money at stake for them to speak out against it.”
"

Karen Drews, a veteran employee of the Irvine Barclay Theatre, suggests this brouhaha is part of something bigger. “When I lived in the south, these young-girl beauty pageants had the same feeling. Some people thought some things the girls were made to do were inappropriate. This debate isn’t new or confined to dance.”

If I'm able to dig up more investigative articles, I'll post them. Most of what I find is just a few short paragraphs with each news organization just using the ole "is it good or bad?" question without actually investigating.
Kaijo is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 15:08   Link #172
Nogitsune
Shameless Fangirl
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Hidden for possibly triggering content (discussion of rape).

Spoiler:
__________________
"I think of the disturbance in Area 11 as a chess puzzle, set forth by Lelouch." - Clovis la Britannia

Last edited by Nogitsune; 2010-06-15 at 16:08.
Nogitsune is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 15:23   Link #173
Kaijo
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow, in a house dropped on an ugly, old woman.
Send a message via AIM to Kaijo Send a message via MSN to Kaijo
This is getting a bit off topic, so I'm just gonna respond to this bit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nogitsune View Post
Ouch.
All right, it's hard for me to reply to this calmly, but I'll try.

Do you see what is wrong with, "I'm not blaming the victimg, but she (partly) brought this onto herself"?
You will always find something you can blame a rape victimg for. She wore a miniskirt! She went outside by herself! She didn't close her window! She had a drink! She trusted someone! She danced! She didn't say no often enough! She didn't fight him enough! She was wearing the wrong shoes! She was wearing the wrong dress! She lives alone and doesn't own a dog or something that imitates barking!
Basically, she was acting like she's actually equal to men!

Stop blaming the victim. If a woman wearing a miniskirt gets rapes, she's no more at fault for that than a man if at fault for getting shot as he is walking home alone, or, heck, in the middle of a supermarket! Rape is an act of violence that can be done to anyone, at any time. It's not that the rapist sees something "sexy" and can no longer control himself. Rape is about power and violence much more than it is about sex, and the only certain way to avoid it is to be fortunate enough to not come across a rapist.

In fact: "Research data clearly proves that a way a woman dresses and / or acts does not influence the rapists choice of victims." Taken from a list of rape myths that can be found here:
Don't put words in my mouth, and don't use strawmen. You're arguing from emotion, and not logic. A rapist is more responsible and at fault then his victim, and usually it's 100% on him(or her if the rapist is female).

But you're basically advocating that someone completely abandon common sense and not be responsible at all about their choices! No one ever makes bad choices, right?

So a woman who walks into a known gang hideout, sexily dressed, hits on the gang members, didn't make any sort of bad choice?

I'd say that, yes, the gang members are mostly at fault for the gang-bang that followed. But she wasn't very smart, either. It *is* possible to blame more than one party in a situation. Yes, I'd love to live in a world where we can be completely safe no matter what we do; but this is reality, and we expect people to take basic security precautions to protect themselves.

They are called Darwin Awards for a reason, when someone's stupid decision ends up killing them.

I'm sorry, I don't abdicate personal responsibility, from anyone. Maybe you do.
Kaijo is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 15:40   Link #174
Nogitsune
Shameless Fangirl
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Hidden for possibly triggering content (discussion of rape).

Spoiler:
__________________
"I think of the disturbance in Area 11 as a chess puzzle, set forth by Lelouch." - Clovis la Britannia

Last edited by Nogitsune; 2010-06-15 at 16:20.
Nogitsune is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 15:52   Link #175
Arbitres
Disabled By Request
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
...Condescending on both sides. Tiresome. Bothersome. Cumbersome. This has derailed from women doing an erotic dance in skampy clothing to rape. But I'll play along before completely shirking away.


Women who dress in an erotic manner need to know the conditions and the consequences of such. Please don't be antagonistic as I know it's hard for you all to not be - so let me finish. But it's not always their fault, but if they dress up and not expect trouble in some form (relentless flirting, harassment. Maybe even rape.)

This is incredibly stupid.

Women who dress up need to take up responsibility. They aren't exempted from it for any reason. It's all fine and dandy to go skampy like a Las Vegas whore so long you know the possibilities.

Rape in general is a problem I'd love to see disappear. We can all agree on rape is an unnecessary evil. So.

Let's. Drop. This.


I swear... You people would fight over who gets to throw a pebble into a lake if you ever got the chance to. :|
Arbitres is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 15:58   Link #176
Nogitsune
Shameless Fangirl
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arbitres View Post
...Condescending on both sides. Tiresome. Bothersome. Cumbersome. This has derailed from women doing an erotic dance in skampy clothing to rape. But I'll play along before completely shirking away.
I feel this is condescending, but maybe that's just me.

The rest of what you wrote...
No comment. Maybe once I have calmed down a little, though the one thing I agree with is that this is not the best place for this, as it could easily trigger someone.

Edit: Speaking of which, I should probably go back and put a trigger warning somewhere.
Edit²: Done.
__________________
"I think of the disturbance in Area 11 as a chess puzzle, set forth by Lelouch." - Clovis la Britannia

Last edited by Nogitsune; 2010-06-15 at 16:20.
Nogitsune is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 16:23   Link #177
synaesthetic
blinded by blood
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 30
Send a message via AIM to synaesthetic Send a message via Skype™ to synaesthetic
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arbitres View Post
Women who dress in an erotic manner need to know the conditions and the consequences of such. Please don't be antagonistic as I know it's hard for you all to not be - so let me finish. But it's not always their fault, but if they dress up and not expect trouble in some form (relentless flirting, harassment. Maybe even rape.)

This is incredibly stupid.

Women who dress up need to take up responsibility. They aren't exempted from it for any reason. It's all fine and dandy to go skampy like a Las Vegas whore so long you know the possibilities.
I don't agree with that at all. For one, rapists don't care what a woman wears. She could be ugly, covered in mud and dressed in a burlap sack.

Rape isn't about sex. It's about power, control, creating fear and terror. Why do you think mentally disabled people get raped? The elderly? You really think those rapists find a fat, wrinkly 90-year-old prune to be sexually attractive?

No, the power they gain over their victim is where the arousal comes from.

I don't buy it. If I go out one night dressed in a short skirt and heels and a tight top, it is one hundred percent not my fault if someone attacks me and rapes me. It is entirely their fault; they made the choice to attack me.

Don't let the whiny leftist handwringers and the destiny-worshipping bible-thumpers tell you different. We're all responsible for our own choices and nothing, nothing is predestined.
__________________
synaesthetic is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 16:27   Link #178
Nogitsune
Shameless Fangirl
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by synaesthetic View Post
I don't buy it. If I go out one night dressed in a short skirt and heels and a tight top, it is one hundred percent not my fault if someone attacks me and rapes me. It is entirely their fault; they made the choice to attack me.
Thank you.
This post, so much.
__________________
"I think of the disturbance in Area 11 as a chess puzzle, set forth by Lelouch." - Clovis la Britannia
Nogitsune is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 16:29   Link #179
Mystique
Honyaku no Hime
*Fansubber
 
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: In the eastern capital of the islands of the rising suns...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arbitres View Post
...Condescending on both sides. Tiresome. Bothersome. Cumbersome. This has derailed from women doing an erotic dance in skampy clothing to rape. But I'll play along before completely shirking away.
Indeed, I've noticed Kaijo that you're doing a run of long ass debates all over GC lately. You are definitely with plently of valid points but methinks the way you ''present" your infomation lately and tone seems to irk a lot of people.
Just something i've noticed while lurking...
And yes this has gotten off topic somewhat.
Beauty pagents pull up a lot of points with Kaijo that I agree with but that this nothing to do with this dance competition save the outifts and attire that were a bad bad choice. Trying to pull it back to dance and culture which is why I quoted Kaijo's latest post, otherwise drop the rape/asking to be hurt/sexy clothes = pedo bait cycle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaijo View Post
I'm just gonna respost this even-handed article for people to re-read. It's one of the few I could find with a more balanced look at the urban dancing scene:

http://artsblog.freedomblogging.com/...oo-sexy/30475/

In case you don't click, I'm gonna repost a few sections from the guy investigating this:

"To me, this style of dance is undoubtedly too risqué for kids this age. But Dance Precision’s girls are by no means unique in their transgression. The world of urban dance is both competitive and popular; other teachers are guilty of allowing their students to perform sexualized material at too young an age, simply to make a big impression at competitions."

“This (dance routine) isn’t something I would feel comfortable with in my classroom or on a public stage, especially for girls this age,” said Jennifer Backhaus, who teaches dance at Chapman University and runs her own modern dance company. “But this is a different world from the one I’m in. There are different expectations and pressures.”

“I see it more and more,” said Festival Ballet artistic director Salwa Rizkalla from her studio in Fountain Valley. “This style of dance isn’t part of the (ballet) aesthetic, of course, and I would never allow it. But many young girls are being exposed to it now.”


"But when I tried to get a dance teacher to make a similar defense of Dance Precisions on the record, I struck out time and again. (Dance Precision’s owners refused my requests for comment – they were clearly shaken by the controversy when I talked to them.)

A seasoned commercial choreographer who requested anonymity summed it up for me. “This is a big, lucrative part of the dance scene, and some of my friends teach girls in schools like Dance Precisions. There’s too much money at stake for them to speak out against it.”
"

Karen Drews, a veteran employee of the Irvine Barclay Theatre, suggests this brouhaha is part of something bigger. “When I lived in the south, these young-girl beauty pageants had the same feeling. Some people thought some things the girls were made to do were inappropriate. This debate isn’t new or confined to dance.”

If I'm able to dig up more investigative articles, I'll post them. Most of what I find is just a few short paragraphs with each news organization just using the ole "is it good or bad?" question without actually investigating.
I got 5 pages of catch up to do xD
I dunno how I'm gonna compile the posts but will try, the World Cup has my attention and even then I'm missing so many games cause of stupid timezones, but I've seen tons of good posts that got ignored in here cause of the debates with Kaijo lately, so gonna try to bring some back to focus.
This includes this points of 'dance too sexualised for kids', I'll have to dig up and link from page 1 and 2 again, if many pple didn't read the lengthy debate about urban dance as a subculture.
It is not new Kaijo, just 'new' in mainstream West cause of J-Lo and Beyonce. Suddenly the West was 'its all about the booty and swing of hips' but Latin-America and many African/Carribbean countries have these kinds moves and dances for decades if not centuries.

It's a subculture as I said, more detail and info on it if i get a chance to breathe (am trying though, this is a topic close to my heart as a dancer so go figure) xD
The West's attitude to it all in the last 10 odd years amuses me
__________________

Worrying is like a rocking chair. It gives you something to do, but it doesn't get you anywhere. - Van Wilder
"If you ain't laughin', you ain't livin'." - Carlos Mencia
Mystique is offline  
Old 2010-06-15, 16:38   Link #180
synaesthetic
blinded by blood
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 30
Send a message via AIM to synaesthetic Send a message via Skype™ to synaesthetic
The West's conception of sexuality in general is totally fucking bonkers, anyway. I blame Christianity, Freud and the National Institute on Media and the Family.
__________________
synaesthetic is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 15:12.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.