What with the internet and all, I’m surprised that all kids haven’t figured out what sex is. I was on my walk the other night and some boys were busy looking at a laptop and shut it as I walked by, while looking at me. I said: “Boys, there is a lot of porn on the internet, and it ain’t gonna watch itself.” They said nothing.
Given the great lengths I went to in order to catch the briefest glimpses ( watching extended periods of scrambled softcore cable channels for those brief moments of suitable clarity, doing 20 seconds of previews on pay-per-view channels that charged after 30 seconds of viewing, and of course sneaking dirty mags whenever possible) I’m a little disappointed that my 16 year old doesn’t appear to be sneaking views. Perhaps he’s just smart enough to do so elsewhere, or knows how to selectively clean his computer while leaving a history of benign content behind. Or maybe it isn’t a big deal because we haven’t lunged for the remote whenever breasts show up.
Kids today have it all too easy.
As if any kid these days is going to look up from texting or tweeting or updating their status on Facebook to even notice there’s a magazine.
Why bother? It’s not like Cosmo doesn’t have a website.
Might I suggest “Johnny Got his Gun”. I never got beyond the first chapter. Or Catch 22 when he’s a bit older.
The girl I love
Is on a magazine cover
It seems they painted her just for me
I’d fall in love
If I could ever discover
A little girl quite as nice as she
Oh, my search will never cease for the girl on the Police Gazette
For the pretty young brunette on the pink Police Gazette . . .
It’s a real horse, too. (No, it wasn’t killed for the movie – they got it from a slaughter house that made dog food)
Especially when you consider that they were married. And Appollonia was a virgin. 
So marital sex = bad. Mafia violence = good. 
BTW, does the movie mention that Brasi
Had a midwife throw his illegitimate child into a furnace? Or was that only in the book?
**Movies and magazine covers are more explicit than decades ago
**I know ! It’s awesome, innit ?
[QUOTE=Darth Panda]
I would say that less than 5% of all movies would not benefit from a topless Natalie Portman wandering around.
[/QUOTE]
I really can’t think of any, besides maybe Schindler’s List.
Kids are going to find this stuff out, with or without the store censorship. Hell, I remember sneaking a peek at the National Lampoon magazine because they had bare breasts in the foto funnies section.
With today’s internet access, I don’t know how a parent could possibly keep a kid from finding out stuff I’ve probably never even heard of or thought of.
That’s where I first saw a guy put his foot up a woman’s ass (literally). The internet is so graphic, I doubt kids would even notice that Cosmo cover, or anything else you might find objectionable.
There is so much more stuff available for my children than there was for me as a kid.
There’s also more stuff available for me as an adult than there was for my parents.
Overall, I’ll say progress is good. Kids have it good today, and so do the grownups.
I’d be more worried about my kids downloading a virus onto their computer from looking at porn, rather than the porn site itself. (Well, depending on the age of the kid – I don’t think I’d want a five-year-old watching porn, of course.)
This seems to be the crux of the issue:
a) His wife gets mad if his son sees sexual content in films.
b) He admits to being too lazy to check ahead of time if a movie he wants to watch has sexual content.
c) He apparently isn’t able to watch the movies he wants to watch (which contain sexual content) without his son being present.
Setting aside any discussion of the violent (but “excellent”) movies which he does feel are appropriate for his son to watch…I just don’t feel much sympathy here. Watch the movies with naked breasts after your son goes to bed, maybe?
Poor you! Too lazy to read an MPAA rating! What an overworked parent you must be.
Look, children are the among the most catered to group from Hollywood. When I was a kid, there were maybe half a dozen children’s movies released a year, mostly from Disney.
Now there is a new kid’s movie out every other damn week:
Gnomeo & Juliet
Justin Bieber: Never Say Never
Rango
Hop
Rio
Kung Fu Panda 2
The Lion of Judah
Mr. Popper’s Penguins
Cars 2
Winnie the Pooh
The Smurfs
Spy Kids 4D: All the Time in the World
The Lion King 3D
Dolphin Tale
Puss in Boots
Happy Feet Two
Arthur Christmas
Hugo
The Muppets
Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked
The Adventures of Tintin
We Bought a Zoo
These are just the ones I found in a probably incomplete search for 2011. The idea that there is nothing to take kids to is preposterous.
The fact that most of these movies are crap is more the fault of parents indulging their whiny brats and taking them to every damn thing that is promoted to them on television, of which at last count has more than half a dozen cable channels devoted exclusively to nauseating kidvid.
When we were young, there were four broadcast channels, kidvid was limited to Saturday Morning, and we liked it that way. Now the little brats can stay plugged in to nick and Disney and God knows what else, 24/7. And we wonder why kids are fat and high school graduation rates are in the dumper.
Now get off my lawn.
On the one hand, there are far too many restrictions that are ostensibly to protect kids but end up interfering with my own enjoyment.
On the other hand, I am over all the gratuitous sex and grotesquely graphic violence they stick into TV and movies just to be edgy and to titillate. Make it important to the plot or don’t have it at all. The older I get, the less interested I am in seeing that kind of stuff in my regular entertainment. But then the restrictions that everyone has to adhere to also seem arbitrary and increasingly absurd.
I like how Europe and the UK do it. I do not like how America does it.
While Australia doesn’t have a frakking clue what it’s doing.
You should see Japan’s TV. It’s an odd mix between appalling, ridiculous, offensive, tacky, awesome and plain fucking weird. One thing for sure, though: they don’t even have “clue” in their dictionaries.
7 day old thread isn’t a zombie… right?
Hope not, because I want to weigh in here.
Cosmo and Playboy allowed me to understand sexuality.
Probably incorrectly, though my girlfiends and wife seem to have been relatively happy.
Back in the 1960s, you NEVER saw nudity unless you went to a drive-in movie, at least not in Atlanta, Georgia.
I would have been much better off being raised with nudity than violence.
How the heck can we even equate them?
Its like apples to exploded oranges.
But, the marketplace will decide. If Kroger wants to cover up Cosmo, then I will make a point of looking anyway. After all, breasts are wonderful, and if I EVER see a Cosmo cover without cleavage I will know that the End Is Nigh.