 milnoc
join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:1 | reply to jjoshua
Re: That album said by jjoshua:is now the most popular page on wikipedia. So in an attempt to prevent access to a an image classified as child porn, the UK child porn filters have had the opposite effect. Where have I seen this before? 
I didn't find the image to be that sexually suggestive, no worse than what we see in the mainstream media today, with or without the nudity. But in its context, I did find the album cover to be highly questionable. When I first saw it, I yelled out "Yikes! What were they thinking?"
To be honest, I'm much more concerned with today's portrayal of young women, both pre- and post-pubescent, in the mainstream media. The "Beauty" industry has created a morally and physically toxic society where being sexually suggestive has now become a high priority for most little girls. It hammers down the belief that if you're not sexually attractive long before you're sexually developing, you're a complete failure at life.
And you don't have to look very far to see this twisted perception in real life. Just look at all those American "beauty contests" which feature hyper-sexualized little girls so young that some of them aren't even out of diapers yet!
In another twist of irony, the Canadian branch of the Dove beauty soap company has embarked on a public relations campaign (i.e. propaganda) by launching a "self-esteem" fund to help rebuild the self-esteem of young women across Canada, the same self-esteem they've been very busy demolishing for decades.
I do agree with Rudolf Schenker who now finds the cover to be in very bad taste. What's worse, the album cover was conceived by the record company! Considering the use of the image in context with the title of the album ("Virgin Killer"), someone wasn't thinking straight back then.
What was the popular drug back in the Seventies again? |
