Posted on 07/09/2002 1:12:54 PM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
God knows I’m not a prude. As a teenager, I hid Playboys under my mattress, ogled the lingerie ads in the Sears Catalog and even knew about the secret place at my high school where you could look into the girls’ locker room shower.
On most Saturday nights, I was in the back seat of my ’57 Ford at the Autodrome drive-in in Radford, Virginia, wrestling with some young lady, trying to score the teenage sexual equivalent of a home run (funny how we learned early on to equate sports and sex).
In the immortal words of Meatloaf in his anthem to raging teenage hormones, the goal was to “see paradise by the dashboard light.”
Memories of those angst-filled days came back over the 4th of July weekend while sitting under a refreshment stand tent at a carnival in East St. Louis, Illinois, watching too many young girls parade by in the accepted attire of the times.
After an hour of so of this, I had to wonder: How in the hell does a teenage boy today keep his hormones under control? Lord, I had enough trouble when a glimpse of young female leg above the knee would satisfy the lustful cravings of a young man’s desire.
But now, with bare-midriff tops, low slung jeans, low-cut haltertops, thongs and see through blouses, there ain’t a hell of a lot left to the imagination.
We’re not talking about just 17, 18 or 19 year old hardbodies here, but 12 and 13 year olds wearing shorts low enough for the tops of thongs to show and blouses with enough open buttons to show what they may one day have to show.
Add to that enough navel, nose and eyebrow rings to start a jewelry store and you start to wonder just when it became acceptable for young women to dress like hookers.
Like most men, I enjoy looking at sexy young things, although at my age, “young” begins at about age 45. But I wonder if young girls shouldn’t at least go through puberty before letting all that they may or may not have hang out for public view.
Should a 15-year-old girl be parading around in public wearing jeans cut so low that they require shaving of pubic hair or shorts that ride high enough in back to show off butt cheeks? Are parents allowing this or are these nymphets changing into their CFM attire after they leave home?
If current teenage attire can shock even a dirty old man like me, has it gone to far?
I don’t have an answer. I do find it unsettling. If I had a teenage daughter right now, I’d probably lock her away until a safer age, say about 30 or maybe even 40.
A woman who likes sex and isn't ashamed of her sexuality doesn't value herself?
(Why am I fighting the feminists battle here? Aren't there some lurking liquour license types on FR to handle this??)
I remember getting into an argument with my daughter in a store about a low profile baseball cap she wanted. It had a winking smiley face embroidered on the front, and it said "flirt" beneath the smiley face. I refused to buy it, unless she agreed to remove the word "flirt" with a pair of scissors. I can't remember if she wanted to buy it after that or not, in retrospect, I should have been MUCH TOUGHER!!!!
I made the same daughter model a pair of shorts she argued with me about wearing for her dad. He made her go put on a longer pair.
Pitty the 10 year old still at home -- she's gonna have a much stricter Mama.
Early South Americans sacrificed virgins to improve crop yields, etc. Today, they are being sacrificed to improve what- the stock market position of a few mega clothing and entertainment companies? Screw 'em. It's no different, and this form of 'sacrifice enmasse' must stop or else you can kiss whatever ideals you might have about personal freedoms good-bye, along with the culture that once rested upon it's foundation.
Sound harsh? It should, freedom and responsibility come as a package and this 'package' is loaded with irresponsibility.
Parents and others who 'enable' this exploitation are merely unthinking sheep. A truly free-thinking society would bankrupt those who enduldge in this type of marketing, the exploitation of children.
"Sorry Calvin, got no virgins for you to sacrifice today".
Chaulk another one up to the Clinton legacy...
Emulate Monica. Snap thong. Etc.
Exactly. Wasn't she about 14 at the time? Her parents went for the buck. Klein made a (few) bucks. The cycle continues. Question for Klein: "What's next, an eight year old in a thong?" (FWIW, I think I already know the answer.)
The "inner city" varient is:
What's the difference between a Ho and a B***h?
The Ho will only sleep with you because you got money
The B***h doesn't think you got enough money for her
In many ways, I think it took him off the map, so to speak. What map you ask? The map that guides us all to a certain destination where we may enjoy all of our freedoms as individuals.
Adulthood and childhood are two distinctly different conditions. Go ahead and exploit adults for all it's worth, but children are a different matter. Exploit a child and accept the risks that come with it. For some this might include upping their dental insurance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.