And I guess what really burns my ass about this is the hypocrisy. “We can’t have the little darlings knowing anything about violence or drugs or sexuality and in the name of protecting them we are going to show them commercials that show all that stuff.” I mean seriously, WTF? WTF!?! Mistress Mandy is on Nick, but the Attorney General wants to shut down my favorite pr0n website? At the risk of being redundant, WTF?
I see nothing wrong with the commercials, but do agree that Nickelodeon is not the proper venue for them. I would let your cable provider know how you feel about it.
I don’t know what I find more disturbing: that Miss Mandy is depicted in the afternoon to kids, or that the OP’s godchild knows what sado-masochism is.
“Sometimes, when Daddy’s been a real bad boy…”
I find it weird this was on Nick. The commercials are targeted to the parents, so put them on channels the parents are likely to watch and the kids aren’t. After all, them knowing channels are blocked is the first step toward them overcoming those blocks, the nosy little ba- ahem.
That said, I don’t see anything really wrong with the commercial, seen through the eyes of a kid. Mistress Mandy really isn’t any worse than many female villainesses of kid’s shows I’ve seen, and for certain I would never have connected her getup to sex at a preteen age.
I’d like to point out that many of these ads are placed by your cable/satellite provider and not by the network at all. Your first complaint should be to the provider, *then *to the network. It is quite possible that Viacom has no idea that the ad is being patched in to Nickelodeon’s commercial time.
I think that you’re going too far with that, and yes, overreacting. I might have raised an eyebrow, but just because of wondering why they were putting that series of ads on Nick. It would be obvious to a reasonably bright kid that it’s something forbidden, just like all of the other ads. But there’s nothing in that particular one that spells out anything sexual other than you knowing the context/intent, and that kid won’t know what it specifically refers to unless she’s already familiar with cat-suited women with whips.
Now, mom might get some uncomfortable questions, but if she can’t handle those, she’d better home school because public school is going to be a problem…
I agree that it’s waaay over the line. “Adult themes” aren’t supposed to be on the kiddie channels. Period.
I’m tired of being hassled by the kid as it is.
Yesterday I had to explain why the Sam-I-Am doll doesn’t have a penis.
I’m driving the car, changing lanes in fact, and all of a sudden I’m supposed to have a ready answer?
If my 3-yr-olds start asking about whips and leather while Daddy’s tooling down the freeway, there’s gonna be an accident.
There was an episode of Doug where Judy is dressed up in a tight leather S&M outfit, a leather bra, spiked heels, and carrying a whip. Doug addresses her as “Mistress Judy.” It’s part of one of those imagination sequences (where the screen would fade and distort and there would would be this “whoo-whoo-whoo-whoo” sound, and then an outlandish scenario would be shown.) Doug is her “slave for a week” after breaking a vase, or something.
Re watching this episode recently, I was amazed at how blatantly S&M the outfit was.
Mistress Mandy emasculated him ? 
That reminds me of the time I picked up an Aladdin doll that a young cousin of mine had stripped of clothes and discarded. I found it oddly disturbing to note that it was ( unsurprisingly ) lacking genitalia - but had quite realistic buttocks.
Obviously, Disney is promoting a castration fetish ! :eek: Shame ! Shame !
I am officially in love with you, gigi. I have given orders to the monkeys that, once I am God-King of America, you are not to be executed without good reason.
That commercial was on in the afternoon?? On Nick??? I’m with you on this one Wanderer - What in the bleepity censored dammit were they thinking? Answer: they weren’t thinking.
:rolleyes:
Are any of the ads in this series appropriate to air during Spongebob - even if Mr. Crabs changed the name of his establishment to the “Club Badda Crab”?
Of course six year-old girls should be watching this ad. Mistress Mandies don’t pop up overnight, you know, it takes years of physical and psychological preparation, and the earlier the recruiting starts, the better.
Won’t somebody please think of the children?!?!
Well, not really, because the whole point of the ads is to show parents confronting and blocking television that’s not appropriate for children. To do that, they chose characters and situations not appropriate for children. So it’s, well, not appropriate for children.
It’s sort of like showing a person shooting up in an anti-drug PSA during television hour in a rehab clinic, you know?
Seems to me that without images of leather thongs striking human flesh, it’s more implicit than explicit…
And I thought from the thread title that it was going to be something that they used to do onThe Amanda Show.
Come to think of it, they should have had Amanda Bynes play Mistress Mandy. She would have been great!
I agree that to air this during the afternoon on Nick is unacceptable according to current standards. It’s also likely to cause a lot of awkwardness for any parents that watch it with their kids and/or have to answer any questions about it. That’s enough to make it a mistake to air it in that slot.
However, I don’t think it’s that big of a deal. It’s not necessarily a bad thing to be very matter-of-fact and frank with your kids about sex. Besides, as soon as you told a child that it has something to do with sex, the response would usually be “forget I asked.” Or, if you must, it shouldn’t be hard to tell them a convincing lie.
Emphasis added.
That’s over the line, I think. It just can’t be that harmful for a child to know more than the bare minimum about sex. More importantly, telling someone that they are (or would be) a terrible parent is about the most provocative and insulting thing you can say on a message board.
Agreed.
“Oh, she’s just someone in a silly costume they made up for that commercial. I don’t think she really has a show, hon.”
Anyone who can drive safely with a screaming infant should be able to field Mistress Mandy questions without blinking. Prepubescent kids aren’t interested in sex; we are. You won’t get that many questions. It bothers me a lot more that, after an episode of On-Demand Barney or Caillou, my cable goes back to the generic pool of on-demand commercials, which can very well be for Hellraiser Part XIX or Satan’s Killer Teddy Bears.
Master Coffeecat. Putting Mistress Mandy in her place. Like a good girl. 
Happy Wanderer, FWIW, I totally totally agree with you. It shouldn’t have been on during that timeslot. I’d call the cable co.
I beg to differ, my good man. Just this morning on the way to day camp I was asked by the six y/o (in his typical random fashion) “So how long do you have to do sex to end up with a baby?” I didn’t really understand if he was asking how many times or length of a session of sex so I asked some questions and he specifically asked me how many minutes it should take for a man to finish and get a woman pregnant (in much more juvenile language, of course). Now part of this is because I try to maintain honest, fact based answers every time he asks about this stuff so it’s not like asking about sex is unheard of at my house. So, he is interested. Not in an excited way, just curious for information.
I do agree with your response, though. We are the ones that saw sexualilty in the Mistress, I don’t think my 6 y/o would have had a clue, and he’s pretty quick to pick that sort of thing up.