15 Jan 12, 8:38 PM
CookieMonster
UK, 6 yrs
 |
Clodmin wrote:
CookieMonster wrote:
Clodmin wrote:
CookieMonster wrote:
Clodmin wrote:
CookieMonster wrote:
Clodmin wrote:
Unholy_One wrote:
Tanos wrote:
The Daily Mail, a self-proclaimed 'family newspaper', has been criticised for showing Boots' sex toys in its pages, within full view of children. Daily Mail readers are no doubt 'shocked' and 'disgusted' that the sex aids were on show in the newspaper, removed from packaging.
:T:
|
Shall we try to resist the fashionable temptation to "shoot the messenger" and slag the Daily Mail off?
Because I can use the article from another source if you prefer.
http://www.netmums.com/coffeehouse/general-coffe...
|
Anyone who considers the Daily Mail to be 'The Messenger' as opposed to 'The Pulsing Shaft of Satan's Apocalyptic Cock' needs to be kicked into a pit full of these sexual wellbeing vibrators and left to rattle around in there until what remains of his brain leaks out through his ears.
And Tanos is completely right to point out this hypocrisy. If it's such a bad thing, then why report it?
I remember back in the day when Brian Harvey admitted to a journo that he had taken ecstasy loads of times. He was naive (read: fucking stupid) and didn't know he was 'on record'. The paper printed it and whipped up an outrage about how terrible an influence this is on kids, telling them that 10 ecstasy pills is safe. But no-one would have known about it if they hadn't played 'The Messenger'.
It's not fashionable to despise the Daily Mail. It is a yardstick of rational humanity.
|
No its not rational, its totalitarian to just attack sections of the media regardless how repulsive you beleive them to be.
Its also old hat, from 2004..
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3943779.stm
If you think the mail ones dodgy, look at all the inverted commas etc in this one..
http://news.sky.com/home/business/article/132393...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1474842/B...
All 2004.
|
Nice links. I definitely read them.
Totalitarian? Hmm... While you're googling, you might want to look that up. Here's a link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk
Not really sure what any of your point is. You seem to be defending a terrible newspaper by suggesting that terrible journalism exists elsewhere.
And nobody is 'just attacking' sections of the media. People respond to the prolific bilious outpourings of a newspaper with a demonstrably cynical agenda. It's not a lefty-righty thing. I didn't just decide to hate the Daily Mail. That happened automatically after I read it.
Also not sure what the 2004 thing has to do with, well, anything. It seems to me that you might do as well just to mash your fists onto the keyboard and drool onto the mouse until it clicks on 'send'.
|
Your garbled post doesn't really make much sense. Totalitarian attitude, so you "hate" the Daily mail? Firstly thats an emotion not reason, if you want I'll link you dictionary definitions if you find the concepts muddling.
Do you exstend this emotion to Daily mail readers? What about those you judge as aspousing views that you deem to be in line with this papers view point? Are they also going to be the lucky recipiant of your just and rightious emotions?
Does this pattern by any chance seem in line with a totalitarian attitude? An absolutism that dismisses, out of hand, any article or view?
I personally find The Mail disturbing, but not as disturbing as your attitude, and the attitude of others. If you take the underpants of your head and pencils out of your nostrils you maybe able clear an airway to your brain. Typing with fingers rather than tongue helps as well.
|
I say your post doesn't make sense, you say mine doesn't. I tell you dont understand a word and need to look it up, you tell me the same. I tell say you're typing with your drooling tongue, you say I am.
I remember this game. We used to call it 'I know you are, you said you are, but what am I?' Yes, I'm calling you a child, so be sure to make a similar accusation in your bafflingly stupid response.
As for your list of rhetorical accusations, try to respond to what I actually write. Sure, it would be a lot easier to portray me as a 'totalitarian' if I did hate all readers of the daily mail and want them to die but I don't. I have many friends/relatives who read it and the only thing I would wish on them is enlightenment.
However, you said you find my attitude worrying. Do you also dislike it? Hate me? Want to rid the world of its kitten population through any available means? Hmm. I bet you probably microwave little baby kittens and cackle as their heads explode, don't you? Assuming my logic isn't just a semi-conscious dribble of reactionary non-sequiturs.
|
Is all you do is try to twist words and project. I said its totalitarian not that you are, in that its an attitude not that you are stomping around in jackboots.
Well others understood what I was getting at, do I have to post diagrams and type in caps to make it easier for you?
I didn't say your attitude was worrying, I said disturbing, meaning not quite right. Are all my responses to you just going to be a list of corrections?
Oh and to abbreviate your logic does appear to be dribble. Its as easy to unravel as it is to flip a beatle on its back and lay a lit match against it and wait for it to go pop.
There was an article in the Guardian the other day that had to be quickly edited because they jumped the gun. The Mail in this case missed the start, the finnish, the medal presentation and the next 2 olympics.
Do you understand that?
|
Interesting post.
Not quite the complete works of Shakespeare but much better than expected.
Tell me, how long did it take? Was it one monkey per typewriter or did they end up sharing?
|
I always thought you were 2 primates, Clod and Min but thats another story. Shakespeare? Did one of the characters in your beano comic mention him so you thought you would repeat it?
You remind me of a shakespeare quote from, As you like it.
It is because of fools like you, that make the world full of ill favoured children.
|
15 Jan 12, 9:02 PM
Sorceror
UK(HU), 9 yrs
|
I think that vibrators SHOULD be only sold in licensed sex shops - to protect innocent adult males. The news that "Yes, that does fit all the way in" comes as one hell of a shock... The truth is that for the young children who might see these items they will be ignored as "dull adult stuff". Anything not obviously penis size, shape and colour probably won't be linked to sex. By the time the playground shows an interest in sex the damage is going to be done from so many different sources anyway that the presence of sex toys in Boots will be irrelevant.
S.x. |
16 Jan 12, 9:18 PM
CookieMonster
UK, 6 yrs
|
Sorceror wrote:
I think that vibrators SHOULD be only sold in licensed sex shops - to protect innocent adult males. The news that "Yes, that does fit all the way in" comes as one hell of a shock... The truth is that for the young children who might see these items they will be ignored as "dull adult stuff". Anything not obviously penis size, shape and colour probably won't be linked to sex. By the time the playground shows an interest in sex the damage is going to be done from so many different sources anyway that the presence of sex toys in Boots will be irrelevant.
S.x.
|
Good point.
I dont go into boots but i very much doubt they were displayed on the walls like rhino horns next to the sweets counter, so to speak.
|
2 Feb 12, 1:06 AM
Romola
UK, 7 yrs
|
My favourite Daily Mail stories are the ones illustrated with outraged parents and their sad traumatised, innocence-stripped children.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-412195/T...
"Mum, why is this photographer here?"
"Erm....Because we were forced to explain to you what pole dancing was"
"Mum, what's pole dancing and why does the paper want to take our picture?" It's only a weblog 
|
2 Feb 12, 1:42 AM
Black0rchid
UK, 2 yrs
|
wanderlust wrote:
I have to wonder, these children that are supposed to be traumatised by the graphic descriptions of sexual activity on the packaging- why are they running around a pharmacy unsupervised by the parents that care so much about them ...
|
... when their usual Saturday afternoon would be spent at home in front of their computer or X Box playing "Call of Duty" or any other computer game which involved copious amounts of killing and torture together with "Grand Theft Auto" that their elder brother left lying around.
|
Dislike.