To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.funOpen lugnet.off-topic.fun in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Fun / 10711
10710  |  10712
Subject: 
Re: Shrek 2
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Thu, 27 May 2004 05:33:59 GMT
Highlighted: 
(details)
Viewed: 
1239 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Tim Courtney wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.fun, John Neal wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Tim Courtney wrote:
   Went and saw Shrek 2 Saturday night. Funny beyond words, this is a movie everyone’s gotta see.

The Pinocchio scene was just wrong.

Yeah, it was inappropriate. But, it was unbelievably hilarious too.


No it wasn’t wrong. or inappropriate. They didn’t refer to anything sexual. It’s a feminin underwear. No mentions as to what it could mean, i.e. being a transvestite or being sexy. It was simply an underwaer. A Thong! What’s wrong about that? Man, I can’t believe that in 2004, people are so puritans...



   You’re right, John. I have a big problem with teaching kids that young about erotic attire and attitudes. One example I especially loathe -- and you may have seen this in your time out shopping -- is Club Libby Lu. They teach 4-year-olds the ‘I can shake it like that’ song among other things, and in my opinion, all of the promiscuous themes that go along with it.

I agree. Some songs are sexually explicit or have dance moves to sensual for 4 y.o. But then again, a 4 y.o. doesn’t understand as much as a 13 y.o... And would you tell your 13 y.o. not to see Shrek 2 because of the Thong scene? Could you tell him/her that the popular music is too sexy for his/her age?



   The hip-hop music and its celebration of promiscuity, hedonism, objectification of women, etc will only teach our children that these attitudes and actions are acceptable and expected of them. I fear for the generation going through grade school and Jr. High right now, and what the entertainment profiteers’ messages will inspire them to do when they’re older. It is truly dangerous.

Hmmm... Hedonism is acceptable to me. What isn’t is the objectification of women. Now, you seem to put those 2 together, as if they go together, but women have a sexuality and they too can appreciate it. What this generation will do when they are older isn’t any worst than what my generation did. Our elders thought the same about us. this line of thought you have (it’s dangerous!) is very retro. All generations seem to go further than the previous generation, but in the end, it’s called evolution. Would you rather have the man working, the woman at home like a couple of decades ago? Well, if my parents didn’t act outrageously when they were young, maybe the society would still be like that. Fortunately, they helped our society evolve by breaking taboos. I am all for it.


   (xpost to debate)

   S P O I L E R


^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^


IF Schrek really loved Fiona, he would have remained human and not let her remain an Ogre.

...but it was Fiona’s decision in the end. And plus, if they had remained human, it would have played into the whole Disney picture-perfect cliche that the Shrek movies set out to parody.

Indeed. And why take for granted that Shrek would have been happy as a human? Maybe he would have been terribly sad. Fiona was happy as an ogre. Ogres or humans, the point was to love yourself as you are.


Terry



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Shrek 2
 
(...) Yeah, it was inappropriate. But, it was unbelievably hilarious too. You're right, John. I have a big problem with teaching kids that young about erotic attire and attitudes. One example I especially loathe -- and you may have seen this in your (...) (20 years ago, 25-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

7 Messages in This Thread:



Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR