NationStates Jolt Archive

I was just reading in yesterdays paper about a recent show (http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/features/arts/20060909TDY21004.htm) in which elementary age girls engaged in a reality TV style contest to find who was the most fashionable. The winner was an 8 year old, who's final ensemble was a halter top, faux fur coat, and fishnet stockings. (She also slamed the MC for not being sexy.)

And now I find this:

Retailers peddle padded bras for girls

by Jane Metlikovec

September 09, 2006 12:00am
Article from: Herald-Sun

BREAST-enhancing padded bras for girls as young as six are being sold in Victorian shops.

Childhood experts have warned parents they could be baiting pedophiles by dressing their young girls as raunchy women.

Tiny matching lingerie sets of lacy bras and knickers in many children's brands including Bratz, Saddle Club and Barbie, have hit the shelves aimed at girls who are barely old enough for school.

The Herald Sun last week revealed the latest Bratz Babyz range included sexually provocative baby dolls dressed in leather and lingerie.

The padded Bratz "bralettes" were among more than 30 different junior bra styles starting at size six on sale at a city Target store visited by the Herald Sun yesterday.

The Australian Family Association warned parents against sexualising their children. "We have a growing problem with pedophilia and people viewing children as sex objects," spokeswoman Angela Conway said.

"Children do not need these products and I am appalled. It is more than bad taste. The sexual portrayal of children in this country is illegal and these products are pandering to just that."

Australian Childhood Foundation CEO Dr Joe Tucci said padded bras were "the most ridiculous piece of clothing a parent could buy".

Bratz distributor Funtastic defended the range.

"The idea of the padding is for girls to be discreet as they develop," a spokeswoman said.

"It is more about hiding what you have got than showing it off. It is certainly not there to make children look like they have breasts."

Target also stood by the underwear range. It provided "fashionable items that give girls modesty and style as they go through development changes", a spokeswoman said.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20380241-1243,00.html

I don't even know where to start listing what's wrong with that...

I don't even know where to start listing what's wrong with that...
I know, but I won't. It wouldn't be good for my blood pressure.
:mad:

how morally degenerate.....

A pedophiles dream...

"The idea of the padding is for girls to be discreet as they develop," a spokeswoman said.

"It is more about hiding what you have got than showing it off. It is certainly not there to make children look like they have breasts."

Target also stood by the underwear range. It provided "fashionable items that give girls modesty and style as they go through development changes", a spokeswoman said.

Can someone explain the thinking behind this. not defend it I don't think anyone can just... something rational.

Why is it that most role-models for young girls are sex objects and female cliches?

The Herald Sun last week revealed the latest Bratz Babyz range included sexually provocative baby dolls dressed in leather and lingerie.

The padded Bratz "bralettes" were among more than 30 different junior bra styles starting at size six on sale at a city Target store visited by the Herald Sun yesterday.

I give this three creepy points.

Wow... Maybe next we'll have baby's first crotchless panties...


Ok, I just creeped myself out...

Can someone explain the thinking behind this. not defend it I don't think anyone can just... something rational.

I'm assuming it's because young girls can get embarrassed or even teased for starting to develop breasts very early or very late compared to their friends. This will help them to hide the truth and blend in with the others.

I knew kids try to be adults at a younger and younger age, but this is getting ridiculous.

I want one!

Also, Daistallia 2104, you will have a TG soon.

Wow... Maybe next we'll have baby's first crotchless panties...


Ok, I just creeped myself out...

I think you just creeped out the whole world man...

as for the whole thing with 8 year old sluts, I don't get it, it's just breeding a new army of Chav (is fully aware non Brits have no idea what a Chav is) and then that generation breeds more chavs cos they all get pregnant when they're 13 cos that's what they do, and then the generation line goes from 20 years to like 10...

as for the whole thing with 8 year old sluts, I don't get it, it's just breeding a new army of Chav (is fully aware non Brits have no idea what a Chav is) and then that generation breeds more chavs cos they all get pregnant when they're 13 cos that's what they do, and then the generation line goes from 20 years to like 10...


Chav! Here is a wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chav
I thought it was a racial slur the first time I heard it.

this is too distusting for words.yuk.

Sometimes I long for the 50s and 60s. Little girls in those in those had role models like Dale Evans. I never even thought of wanting a bra or high heels; I wanted cowboy boots, a divided riding skirt and matching buckskin vest and a cowboy hat.

Padded bras - what a horrible thing to do to little girls.

Chav! Here is a wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chav
I thought it was a racial slur the first time I heard it.

for once in Wiki's life, Wiki is wrong

I have only once heard the term Chav summed up in a perfect manner for American audiences: Trailer Trash

Sometimes I long for the 50s and 60s.

You and me both man!

Chav! Here is a wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chav
I thought it was a racial slur the first time I heard it.
It is a racial slur, it comes from "Charver", a gypsy word for "thieving bastard".

Oh and no dissing teenage parents, please, I'm the son of what was an 18-year-old woman, so I don't take kindly to the notion that they're crap mums.

Ok, in all honesty, I didn't read that particular wiki I posted. If it says something about teenaged mothers, then it's news to me. I just like to use the wiki...

It is a racial slur, it comes from "Charver", a gypsy word for "thieving bastard".

Oh and no dissing teenage parents, please, I'm the son of what was an 18-year-old woman, so I don't take kindly to the notion that they're crap mums.

Sorry man, I'm just going on what I've seen that's all, I mean i'm not saying everyone is the same cos I've seen that's true aswell, so sorry dude, oh and I was under the assumption that the word Chav came from many different sources, first time I heard it was from the magazine Zoo and before that they were just called Townies so it doesn't make that much difference.

Sorry man, I'm just going on what I've seen that's all, I mean i'm not saying everyone is the same cos I've seen that's true aswell, so sorry dude, oh and I was under the assumption that the word Chav came from many different sources, first time I heard it was from the magazine Zoo and before that they were just called Townies so it doesn't make that much difference.
Aye, for some reason they started being called Chavs (that originated in the south), but there are many names - they are called Kevs in the northeast, Neds in Glasgow, a variety of other things, and dumbed-down Chavs/Kevs/whatever are oft-named "Townies".

Meh. They already have thongs, and its not like I'll mess up and think a 6 year old is 18, and I'm not concerned with whats down her shirt anyway. Pedophiles like kids because they are undeveloped anyway, so, if anything, it will ward them off.

for once in Wiki's life, Wiki is wrong

I have only once heard the term Chav summed up in a perfect manner for American audiences: Trailer Trash

Nope. The wiki's listing of "wigger" as the similar US term would be the correct one, not "trailer trash".


It is a racial slur, it comes from "Charver", a gypsy word for "thieving bastard".

The etymology isn't quite so clear. That's one possible etymology, although the Romani root and meaning seem to be differnt from what you give.

But it seems that the word is from a much older underclass, the gypsies, many of whom have lived in that area for generations. Chav is almost certainly from the Romany word for a child, chavi, recorded from the middle of the nineteenth century. We know it was being used as a term of address to an adult man a little later in the century, but it hasn’t often been recorded in print since and its derivative chav is new to most people.

Other terms for the class also have Romany connections; another is charver, Romany for prostitute. Yet another is the deeply insulting pikey, presumably from the Kentish dialect term for gypsy that was borrowed from turnpike, so a person who travels the roads.

Did chavi die out, only to be reinvented recently? That seems hardly likely from the written and anecdotal evidence, and many correspondents report that it is well known to them as a spoken term in various parts of the country; what we’re seeing is a term that has been in active but inconspicuous use for the last 150 years suddenly bursting out into wider popular use in a new sense through circumstances we don’t fully understand.

http://www.worldwidewords.org/topicalwords/tw-cha2.htm

Seriously, this is so friggen creepy... all I can say is that this is an excelent example of why there ought to be laws about what the various corporations can market and sell... OK, so I'm sounding like a fascist, but someone needs to do something...

Meh. They already have thongs, and its not like I'll mess up and think a 6 year old is 18, and I'm not concerned with whats down her shirt anyway. Pedophiles like kids because they are undeveloped anyway, so, if anything, it will ward them off.

Not necessarily. Look at (and how I hate to dredge this back into the light) the sex murder of Jon Benet Ramsey, who was a tarted up 6 year old.

Seriously, this is so friggen creepy... all I can say is that this is an excelent example of why there ought to be laws about what the various corporations can market and sell... OK, so I'm sounding like a fascist, but someone needs to do something...



Like refraining from buying this shit? I'll do my part.

Why is it that most role-models for young girls are sex objects and female cliches?

Like the slut Paris? :mad:

Seriously, this is so friggen creepy... all I can say is that this is an excelent example of why there ought to be laws about what the various corporations can market and sell... OK, so I'm sounding like a fascist, but someone needs to do something...

No we do not need laws to stop this crap, we need parents to step up and say, "Enough already."

I'm assuming it's because young girls can get embarrassed or even teased for starting to develop breasts very early or very late compared to their friends. This will help them to hide the truth and blend in with the others.

At 12 or 13 years old maybe, but at 6?

Sometimes I long for the 50s and 60s. Little girls in those in those had role models like Dale Evans. I never even thought of wanting a bra or high heels; I wanted cowboy boots, a divided riding skirt and matching buckskin vest and a cowboy hat.

Padded bras - what a horrible thing to do to little girls.

You remember Dale Evans? You are as old as I am and those days were good. Twelve cartoons and a feature movie or two for 25 cents on Saturday. :fluffle:

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/8134/cantbelievejd6.jpg

Ok, in all honesty, I didn't read that particular wiki I posted. If it says something about teenaged mothers, then it's news to me. I just like to use the wiki...

You didn't read a link that you posted? You posted a wiki link that anyone can edit without checking it out? A pox on you.:( I've never ever posted a link I didn't read or check, out in it's entirety. Oh, and being of Irish descent, I never exaggerate the truth.

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/8134/cantbelievejd6.jpg

...Is that the e-Thug's little brother?

Who?

No we do not need laws to stop this crap, we need parents to step up and say, "Enough already."

Bingo.

Who?

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h297/Aenimus/e-thug.jpg

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h297/Aenimus/e-thug.jpgteehehe :D

I demand pictoral proof!

Does anyone else think that it is ironic that the parents who would buy this kind of crap for their children are the same ones who are always screaming about pedophiles?

I'm a pretty liberal kind of guy, but I tend to think parents who would buy this kind of thing for their kids probably need a visit or two from social services.

Does anyone else think that it is ironic that the parents who would buy this kind of crap for their children are the same ones who are always screaming about pedophiles?

I'm a pretty liberal kind of guy, but I tend to think parents who would buy this kind of thing for their kids probably need a visit or two from social services.

Thats nothing to do with liberal or conservative just common sense.

On a side note the info on chavs was interesting, in the past I'd always pictured them as being sort of 80's punk for some reason.

Does anyone else think that it is ironic that the parents who would buy this kind of crap for their children are the same ones who are always screaming about pedophiles?

Yep. They're also the ones who are demanding 'SEX SEX SEX!' in everything they see and do, so that it is in everything, on everything, and about everything, and it is 'normal 'to have slept with 20 people before you're 15.

You make Paris Hilton a role model for a generation, then you reap what you sow.

I'm quite the perv, but this is pretty creepy. :(

A pedophiles dream...

I doubt that. I assume that most pedophiles would in fact be turned off by this; since they fall for children - not for tiny adults with boobies.

I demand pictoral proof!
That was in no way a pedo comment!

A pedophiles dream...

Heh. Maybe Pedophiles will be turned away if young girls start dressing older. :p

That was in no way a pedo comment!

That is slandermy good sir.

Thats just wrong, well if its come from Japan where their Parliament didn't want to ban Child Porn because it would damage the economy.....

Thats just wrong, well if its come from Japan where their Parliament didn't want to ban Child Porn because it would damage the economy.....

Oh, bullshit.

6 year olds wearing a bra is bad enough....but padded? that is just plain fucked up.

Any parent who thinks that this is somehow cute or funny on their child needs their head examined.

Now, sexuality in six year olds is just something "cool" for lefty-wannabes, who are the left's version of white suburban white teens trying to act like the only black people they like on tv(hint: it's definitely niether Bill Cosby nor Oprah Winfrey) or those American youths trying to act like the only Japanese tv people they know: Giant robots and Sailor Moon(ever since they edited out the lesbian action, it has become a girlier show. Come on, boys want the guys to hack eachother to pieces while the (anime) girls make out)

In a few generations, which at the rate teenage pregnancy is going, will be about 2023, it will just be "dressing like mommy". Hell, if they got any more naked, they'd be skinned alive.

Now, sexuality in six year olds is just something "cool" for lefty-wannabes, who are the left's version of white suburban white teens trying to act like the only black people they like on tv(hint: it's definitely niether Bill Cosby nor Oprah Winfrey) or those American youths trying to act like the only Japanese tv people they know: Giant robots and Sailor Moon(ever since they edited out the lesbian action, it has become a girlier show. Come on, boys want the guys to hack eachother to pieces while the (anime) girls make out)

In a few generations, which at the rate teenage pregnancy is going, will be about 2023, it will just be "dressing like mommy". Hell, if they got any more naked, they'd be skinned alive.

Can someone translate this please?

Can someone translate this please?

It's a communist conspiracy to let pedophiles take over the world.

It's a communist conspiracy to let pedophiles take over the world.

what do communists have to do with it, private enterprise is illegal in communist countries so the companies making this tiny lingerie don't even exist there

I doubt that. I assume that most pedophiles would in fact be turned off by this; since they fall for children - not for tiny adults with boobies.

Heh. Maybe Pedophiles will be turned away if young girls start dressing older. :p

Don't be so sure about that, guys. As I said above, we have only to look at the Ramsey case.

Thats just wrong, well if its come from Japan where their Parliament didn't want to ban Child Porn because it would damage the economy.....

No. :rolleyes:

what do communists have to do with it, private enterprise is illegal in communist countries so the companies making this tiny lingerie don't even exist there

Don't be so sure about that, guys. As I said above, we have only to look at the Ramsey case.


:headbang:

And from this, I conclude that I can't apparently express well enough the distinction between when i'm joking and when i'm being serious. Heh.

:headbang:

And from this, I conclude that I can't apparently express well enough the distinction between when i'm joking and when i'm being serious. Heh.

I got it. :)

Can someone translate this please?

first paragraph: Six year olds dressing like hookers is partially thanks to people who are trying to be liberals. Notice how I said trying and not succeeding. These "liberals"(notice the quotations) are wannabes, just like those white kids trying to act like gangstas or those people who think that Japan is cool, even though the only things about Japan that they know come from anime shows.

second paragraph: With the way things are going, generations will rarely be seperated by more than 14 years. This is because sex is deemed not just necessary for the survival of our species, but something popular. It used to be that teens who had sex were made fun of. Now, it's the virgins who know that condoms don't really protect against AIDS or herpes. Soon, dressing like a hooker is dressing like mommy(and possibly daddy).

what do communists have to do with it, private enterprise is illegal in communist countries so the companies making this tiny lingerie don't even exist there

They exist. They're just state-run, like all legal companies in commy nations. Well, nations as communist as they're going to get.

That is slandermy good sir.

Libel, really.

I might just be behind on all the Ramsey drama because... well, I'm heartless and don't give a toss about it, but I *really* don't think paedophilia would be involved there.

As people have mentioned, paedophilia is the state of being attracted to youth (in fact, it's specifically the attraction to children of the age before they develope sexually - a lack of hips, breasts, etc on girls, and no facial hair etc for boys). Attraction to pre-teens is something different.

Attraction to a young girl that looks like an old woman (sorry, but 'beauty queens' at that age ALWAYS look like old women to me - all the makeup slathered on them, and the hairstyles... ugh) is NOT paedophilia, no matter the age of the child. Just having sex with a child doesn't make you a paedophile.

In the Ramsey case, I'm betting it was someone who was more attracted to the power of sleeping with someone famous, and having control over her due to her age. That's not paedophilia, it's just being a creepy sleazy control-monger.

---

About bras for six-year-olds? I agree with someone who posted earlier. Fuck trying to stop the companies making such shit - just keep tabs on the parents buying such products and make sure they *cough* lose the source of their reason for buying them. Better for everyone, all 'round.

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/8134/cantbelievejd6.jpg

I love you. :fluffle: :)

Anyway, padded bras for 6 year olds? That's encouraging pedophilia as well as indecency among CHILDREN... Why the hell would a 6 year even NEED a bra? I started puberty at 8 and that is very early to begin with. I didn't really need a bra until 9 or 10, and certainly not a padded one till 11. Whoever is sellign these to such little girls needs to be put out of business, as well as Bratz/Baby Bratz. Bratz dolls are just basically wigger (or Chav to Brits) Barbie dolls.

And anyway, at Target they do have padded bras in the girls' section... RIGHT NEXT TO THE BOYS UNDERWEAR. :upyours:

Anyone else for a nice boycott of Target and teen magazines? *boycotts*

I doubt that. I assume that most pedophiles would in fact be turned off by this; since they fall for children - not for tiny adults with boobies.

Boobettes? Miniboobs? :D

No we do not need laws to stop this crap, we need parents to step up and say, "Enough already."

The problem is that it's parents that are buying this crap. They're the ones creating the demand, not the six year olds. But you're right, we do need to step up and say "No more."

BREAST-enhancing padded bras for girls as young as six are being sold in Victorian shops.
i always knew there was something wrong with those victorians. the people here in adelaide are not THAT kind of freaks.


and no guarentee you guys will get to talk to me for that long, it's been a long time since the last time i was around here. damn uni work...

i always knew there was something wrong with those victorians. the people here in adelaide are not THAT kind of freaks.

No, they're much worse. That's why I escaped. :p

No, they're much worse. That's why I escaped. :p
you left to get away from me, didn't you :p .
i admit we have some loonies around here, but at least we don't have crap like this.
then again. i've been holed up at uni far too much recently and unable to see anything happenning in the real world. it's been around 1/2 a year since the last time i posted here, partially due to uni work.
and for those who ever think it might be fun to program in scheme: don't. it isn't. <shudder>

:headbang:

And from this, I conclude that I can't apparently express well enough the distinction between when i'm joking and when i'm being serious. Heh.

hehe, sorry, but this is wierd, the pedophiles will be destroyed, just NOT with padded bras for 6-year-olds:upyours:

I bet pedophilia crimes are going to increase by 300%.

A pedophiles dream...

I'm taking your post as a representative of the many such instances of this sentiment that are likely to come up over the course of this thread, and of course the similar statements in the article itself. Don't think I'm singling you out.

Now, you seem to be a little confused about what a pedophile is. A pedophile is someone who is attracted to children. Padded bras make children look more like adults. To further qualify my point, pedophiles are attracted to children who look like children, not children who look like adults.

Amazing how people can completely misunderstand this basic fact. Padded bras don't attract pedophiles, they attract people who aren't pedophiles.

Wow... Maybe next we'll have baby's first crotchless panties...


Ok, I just creeped myself out...

I'm probably the only person on this board you didn't just creap out.

Meh. They already have thongs, and its not like I'll mess up and think a 6 year old is 18, and I'm not concerned with whats down her shirt anyway. Pedophiles like kids because they are undeveloped anyway, so, if anything, it will ward them off.

At least someone here remembers that pedophiles are intersted in children. (Of course since the vast majority of child sexual abuse comes from people who are attracted to adults, it might be a bad idea to attract those teliophiles.)

Not necessarily. Look at (and how I hate to dredge this back into the light) the sex murder of Jon Benet Ramsey, who was a tarted up 6 year old.

Incidentally, you should also look at how the one pedophile they brought in for that one turned out to not be the guy who did it.

Does anyone else think that it is ironic that the parents who would buy this kind of crap for their children are the same ones who are always screaming about pedophiles?

I'm a pretty liberal kind of guy, but I tend to think parents who would buy this kind of thing for their kids probably need a visit or two from social services.

Oh, the irony is far from lost on me. They're always blaming pedophiles like me when the real problems are their failures to raise their children properly.

It's a communist conspiracy to let pedophiles take over the world.

Why do I never get the memos on these consipiracies?

hehe, sorry, but this is wierd, the pedophiles will be destroyed, just NOT with padded bras for 6-year-olds:upyours:

Is that threat, by any chance, directed at me?

I bet pedophilia crimes are going to increase by 300%.

Pedophilia crimes? I wasn't aware there was such a category of crime. After I learned 90% of child molesters aren't pedophiles, it seemed to me that you can't use sexual orientation as a classification for a type of crime. At least not with any scholorly legitimacy.

Incidentally, you should also look at how the one pedophile they brought in for that one turned out to not be the guy who did it.

Please show me where I suggested it was Kerr. I have been very careful not to say it was. Both instances where I've brought it up, I simply said that it was a case of a sexual murder of child dressed to look like an adult. Kerr didn't do it, but somebody did.

Pedophilia crimes? I wasn't aware there was such a category of crime. After I learned 90% of child molesters aren't pedophiles, it seemed to me that you can't use sexual orientation as a classification for a type of crime. At least not with any scholorly legitimacy.

I think I understand what you're getting at - making a distinction between child molesters and pedophiles. You're going to have to do some serious backing up to support that one. I'd like to see what real support you can bring to your case. Especially as neither camp in the "pedophiles are/aren't attracted to children dressed as adults" has supported their opinion (beyond the example of the Ramsey case). I did a little digging yesterday, but opinion and the example of child pagents was all I could find.

Now, you seem to be a little confused about what a pedophile is. A pedophile is someone who is attracted to children. Padded bras make children look more like adults. To further qualify my point, pedophiles are attracted to children who look like children, not children who look like adults.

Amazing how people can completely misunderstand this basic fact. Padded bras don't attract pedophiles, they attract people who aren't pedophiles.


That's a damn weak argument. Children with bras are still children. They look like children with bras. You may as well argue that since pants and power suits make women look more like males, women in power suits or pants don't attract heterosexual males.

But any weak argument to support the great pedophilia liberation cause, eh?

Please show me where I suggested it was Kerr. I have been very careful not to say it was. Both instances where I've brought it up, I simply said that it was a case of a sexual murder of child dressed to look like an adult. Kerr didn't do it, but somebody did.

I was under the impression that they'd never been able to confirm that it was a sexual murder in the first place. There were inconsistencies with that assumption, particularly, that the police had never seen a ransom demanded for a sexually modivated kidnapping. Further, the media reported that testing on the subject of sexual assault was "inconclusive". You may not have been directly implicating Karr, but you have been making the assumption that some pedophile came off the streets, raped and murdered the girl, rather than the plethora of other options, including the family. It's a bad example to use, when everyone has their pet theory about what happened, and no one agrees on the truth.

I think I understand what you're getting at - making a distinction between child molesters and pedophiles. You're going to have to do some serious backing up to support that one. I'd like to see what real support you can bring to your case. Especially as neither camp in the "pedophiles are/aren't attracted to children dressed as adults" has supported their opinion (beyond the example of the Ramsey case). I did a little digging yesterday, but opinion and the example of child pagents was all I could find.

Did some digging, did you? Have you tried this forum?

Here are two threads on the subject, both over 100 pages long and containing statistics and whatnot proving the difference between pedophiles and child molesters.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=490483
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=489731

As for proving pedophiles aren't attracted to children dressed as adults, I can tell you that I'm not particularly attracted to children dressed as adults, but as you should have noted from the post you are quoting, I am a pedophile.

That's a damn weak argument. Children with bras are still children. They look like children with bras. You may as well argue that since pants and power suits make women look more like males, women in power suits or pants don't attract heterosexual males.

Fact: Pedophiles are attracted to people lacking secondary sex characteristics.
Fact: Breasts are a secondary sex characteristic.
Conclusion: Fake boobs on kids aren't attractive to pedophiles.

This isn't rocket science here.

But any weak argument to support the great pedophilia liberation cause, eh?

Weak arguement, eh? Would you care to see the various statistics I could dig up demonstrating that a given nonpedophile is anywhere from 2 to 24 times as likely as a given pedophile to molest a child? Are you interested in me quoting FBI sex offender experts and clinical psychologists all supporting my arguements?

You couldn't even understand a simple arguement based on the definition of a pedophile. Why should I think you'll bother to listen to my more complicated arguements?

I'm assuming it's because young girls can get embarrassed or even teased for starting to develop breasts very early or very late compared to their friends. This will help them to hide the truth and blend in with the others.

How? Padded bras add to the breast size. How is a 6 year old girl going to blend in with her friends better when she is suddenly the only one with breasts? At that age, you don't even yet need (or generally even want) a training bra, which is literally just a bunch of material that is vaguely bra-shaped, but has essentially no cups.

No we do not need laws to stop this crap, we need parents to step up and say, "Enough already."

Exactly. The fact that this is even an issue demonstrates that there is a market for this.

The other day, I saw a girl who couldn't have been older than 11 with a woman who was presumably her mother. She was wearing a cropped tube-top with a rhinestone Playboy Bunny on it, as well as tight-fitting, low-riding jeans and heavy make-up. What type of parent would find that to be appropriate dress for a girl that age?

Fact: Pedophiles are attracted to people lacking secondary sex characteristics.
Fact: Breasts are a secondary sex characteristic.
Conclusion: Fake boobs on kids aren't attractive to pedophiles.


Fact: Pedophiles are attracted to children
Fact: Children, even wearing padded bras, are children
Conclusion: Pedophiles are as attracted to bra'd children as braless children.

Unless of course they are so fooled by and dependent on fashion for their sexual attraction that they'd also (for example) be attracted to adults who are dressed up as children...


Weak arguement, eh?

Yep.

Would you care to see the various statistics I could dig up demonstrating that a given nonpedophile is anywhere from 2 to 24 times as likely as a given pedophile to molest a child?

I've seen your bullshit statistics argument. But, you were making a different bullshit argument and it was that which I was responding to, so quit trying to change the subject.

Are you interested in me quoting FBI sex offender experts and clinical psychologists all supporting my arguements?

Are you interested in children, sexually?

If the answer is yes, then you might like to know that I'm not interested in any justifications you have for your sick fucking perversion.

How? Padded bras add to the breast size. How is a 6 year old girl going to blend in with her friends better when she is suddenly the only one with breasts? At that age, you don't even yet need (or generally even want) a training bra, which is literally just a bunch of material that is vaguely bra-shaped, but has essentially no cups.

I think what he's saying is that if everyone is wearing these padded bras, it's harder to tell when someone's switched over to a regular one without the padding. At least that's how I read that post.

I was under the impression that they'd never been able to confirm that it was a sexual murder in the first place. There were inconsistencies with that assumption, particularly, that the police had never seen a ransom demanded for a sexually modivated kidnapping. Further, the media reported that testing on the subject of sexual assault was "inconclusive". You may not have been directly implicating Karr, but you have been making the assumption that some pedophile came off the streets, raped and murdered the girl, rather than the plethora of other options, including the family. It's a bad example to use, when everyone has their pet theory about what happened, and no one agrees on the truth.


Did some digging, did you? Have you tried this forum?

Err... No, NSG is generally not where I go to research a subject.

Here are two threads on the subject, both over 100 pages long and containing statistics and whatnot proving the difference between pedophiles and child molesters.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=490483
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=489731

I had avoided those like the plauge. Having scanned them, I can see why. And seeing as the direction this has veered off on, and the mods conclusions (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11493555&postcount=1705), I will be asking that the thread be closed to avoid conflict.

As for proving pedophiles aren't attracted to children dressed as adults, I can tell you that I'm not particularly attracted to children dressed as adults, but as you should have noted from the post you are quoting, I am a pedophile.

Err... no I didn't note that. I see.

The other day, I saw a girl who couldn't have been older than 11 with a woman who was presumably her mother. She was wearing a cropped tube-top with a rhinestone Playboy Bunny on it, as well as tight-fitting, low-riding jeans and heavy make-up. What type of parent would find that to be appropriate dress for a girl that age?

A bad one.

I think what he's saying is that if everyone is wearing these padded bras, it's harder to tell when someone's switched over to a regular one without the padding. At least that's how I read that post.

Ah, so it is a product that only works if every single young girl buys it. Otherwise, it does exactly the opposite. How very interesting....

Sounds like a pretty ridiculous explanation to me.

Fact: Pedophiles are attracted to children
Fact: Children, even wearing padded bras, are children
Conclusion: Pedophiles are as attracted to bra'd children as braless children.

Unless of course they are so fooled by and dependent on fashion for their sexual attraction that they'd also (for example) be attracted to adults who are dressed up as children...

The original arguement was that these padded bras would entice and encourage pedophiles. My arguement was a refutation of that. Having trouble following, or are you just being deliberately dificult?

Yep.



I've seen your bullshit statistics argument. But, you were making a different bullshit argument and it was that which I was responding to, so quit trying to change the subject.

Good to know you've heard my arguements, though it's sad you've decided to completely ignore them in favor of maintaining your bigoted views. We can keep talking on this subject if you're interested, but from this post, it seems your only interest lies in delivering verbal abuse.

Are you interested in children, sexually?

Yes. I felt I made that clear in the last couple posts you responded to. Are you having trouble reading my posts, or are you just trying to be extra careful? To eliminate any ambiguety, I'm sexually attracted to girls from birth to age ten. (And have never been inappropriate with any children.)

If the answer is yes, then you might like to know that I'm not interested in any justifications you have for your sick fucking perversion.

So, you're willfully ignorant. Too bad. It's more interesting when people are interested in having an actual debate rather than a pissing contest.

I once heard it as a "White Boy Gangsta Wannabe".

In the US its usually a suburban upper middle class desperately trying to be "Inner City"/"Gansta" in the extremely stupid belief that such is cool.

On the original topic:

I'm quite disturbed.
Horrified even.

Err... No, NSG is generally not where I go to research a subject.

It makes for an interesting starting point. After all, there's an almost constand call for evidence no matter the subject, so it almost always results in someone posting some evidence. From there, it's a little easier to fill in the blank spots.

I had avoided those like the plauge. Having scanned them, I can see why.
They're full of people posturing, and a lot of death threats, but if you filter those out, there are some intersting arguements made. Hopefully you picked up on those in your scan.
And seeing as the direction this has veered off on, and the mods conclusions (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11493555&postcount=1705), I will be asking that the thread be closed to avoid conflict.

Probably a good idea. I've said my peace, and refuted some of the lies and misinformation being spread about me.

Err... no I didn't note that. I see.

I tried to make it clear. Guess it wasn't as obvious as I thought.

Ah, so it is a product that only works if every single young girl buys it. Otherwise, it does exactly the opposite. How very interesting....

Sounds like a pretty ridiculous explanation to me.

I didn't say it made sense. It was just my interpretation of that post you seemed confused about.

Alright, I got freaked out when they offered thongs to preteens, but this just makes me sick.

That is slandermy good sir.
It is Slander when i try and protect you?o_O

Pedophilia crimes? I wasn't aware there was such a category of crime. After I learned 90% of child molesters aren't pedophiles, it seemed to me that you can't use sexual orientation as a classification for a type of crime. At least not with any scholorly legitimacy.

Fair enough. I probably didn't phrase what I meant in the right way. What I was thinking of when I wrote that was the fact that so many of the cases of sexual abuse/child molestation feature a man who claims that the little girl (or boy) somehow wanted it, that she was leading him on and/or flirting with him. I can only imagine that a little girl wearing a padded bra would invite such cognitions.

One thing that redeems this somewhat - despite what the article implies, "size 6" and "six-year-olds" aren't actually synonymous. One of my younger cousins is 14 and wears a girl's size 8, because she's just that tiny. I certainly wore sizes smaller than my age would suggest for most of my childhood. It is, therefore, fairly likely that these bras really are being marketed towards girls going through the early stages of puberty, contrary to what the size numbers suggest.

That said, I still think they're pretty stupid.

Fair enough. I probably didn't phrase what I meant in the right way. What I was thinking of when I wrote that was the fact that so many of the cases of sexual abuse/child molestation feature a man who claims that the little girl (or boy) somehow wanted it, that she was leading him on and/or flirting with him. I can only imagine that a little girl wearing a padded bra would invite such cognitions.

First off, let me say, I appreciate you accepting my criticism of your wording.

Secondly, I think you're giving these child molesters too much credit. They claim a lot of things, but do you think they're being completely honest. When they make the kinds of claims you're refferencing, they're usually in the "save my own ass" mode. They will say anything at that point to somehow midigate their guilt. They won't say what criminal psychologists know from years of study, that the vast majority of these molesters are modivated by the rush of power they get from dominating someone smaller and weaker than them. They won't say that they picked little kids because they're more availible and less likely to fight back. It just isn't in the interests of these people to be honest.

Yes, some people genuinely are involved in a mutual relationship that ends up crossing the line, but that is a clear minority of cases.

As for adults misreading signals, what are you expecting as a defense?

"I swear officer! I didn't know she was three!"

Somehow, I don't think that one's likely to fly.

I think what he's saying is that if everyone is wearing these padded bras, it's harder to tell when someone's switched over to a regular one without the padding. At least that's how I read that post.
actually, if you think about it from a business stundpoint, then the idea makes sense. if everyone has to wear them to get them to work and you manage to actually convince people that it would be a good idea to get it to wrok, then it'll make them alot of money by having everyone buy them
that said, it's a stupid idea in aparently everyones point of view... ...stupid businesses

Chav! Here is a wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chav
I thought it was a racial slur the first time I heard it.

Oh, you mean white chocolate? That is what image of the "stereotypical chav" bring to mind, as well as the reference to "bling"


Edit: If it's not that, then I can't think of any other group in american society that fits that description.

sickening, just sickening...

I wish I was a child psycologist over there with the ammount of trauma thats going to cause Id be set for life with that job there would never be a day where id have to wonder if im going to have some one new so I would never have to worry about work. be great job security.

First off, let me say, I appreciate you accepting my criticism of your wording.

Secondly, I think you're giving these child molesters too much credit. They claim a lot of things, but do you think they're being completely honest. When they make the kinds of claims you're refferencing, they're usually in the "save my own ass" mode. They will say anything at that point to somehow midigate their guilt. They won't say what criminal psychologists know from years of study, that the vast majority of these molesters are modivated by the rush of power they get from dominating someone smaller and weaker than them. They won't say that they picked little kids because they're more availible and less likely to fight back. It just isn't in the interests of these people to be honest.

Yes, some people genuinely are involved in a mutual relationship that ends up crossing the line, but that is a clear minority of cases.

As for adults misreading signals, what are you expecting as a defense?

"I swear officer! I didn't know she was three!"

Somehow, I don't think that one's likely to fly.

Well, let me make two points in my favor:

- In the classic "Lolita," good old Humbert Humbert is convinced, CONVINCED that the little girl is coming on to him. When you hear a statement like that over and over again from real-life Humberts, it just seems silly NOT to pay attention to it.

- Juries tend to say that a rape victim who dressed in provocative clothing or was acting as if she would welcome sex was "just asking for it" and don't condemn the rapist as much. It is kind of a leap, but if a guy went after a little girl who was wearing "sexy" adult clothing, including a padded bra, he could say that a) she looked older, and b) she wanted it. I could almost see a jury saying, "Well...I could understand how he could think that." So even though they'd agree he's scum, there could be reasonable doubt. One acquittal or hung jury on a case like that would set a legal precedent.

Well there is one redeeming factor. Now little girls won't grow up with the illusion that anyone will take them seriously when they grow up. They'll understand that their job as females is to look sexy. If only we could start them a little earlier on Anorexia and Bulemia we'd be all set. [/sarcasm]