Little Girls Unleash F-Bombs For Feminism

[KitchenFly]

Little Girls Unleash F-Bombs For Feminism (Video Included) - YouTube

 

[Rasofy]

I'm ok with cussing, but I don't think they are old enough to know what they are talking about. They are being used as pawns to a dubious cause.

The saddest part was the shift between the sassy, yet inquiring, tone of the children to the downright condescending tone of the two 'empowered women'.

 

[Rasofy]

ok, enough liberal bashing

xoxo

 

[KitchenFly]

I'm ok with cussing, but I don't think they are old enough to know what they are talking about. They are being used as pawns to a dubious cause.

The saddest part was the shift between the sassy, yet inquiring, tone of the children to the downright condescending tone of the two 'empowered women'.

What types do you see the two downright condescending empowered women as being? [MENTION=13260]Rasofy[/MENTION]

 

[anastasiaromanova]

Different types than the three upright egalitarian powerful men, clearly.

 

[Lark]

I just see this as part and parcel of the degeneration that's going on, I'm not even sure people have a clue what's being lost.

When all civility and social learning/memory has been wiped out and the world is functioning like Memento it's not like any kind of back tracking or second thoughts will be possible by then.

 

[Totenkindly]

I had mixed feelings.

Not sure of the ages. 5-8, perhaps? As far as "indoctrination" goes, parents are indoctrinating children with values in any family by that point. Is it wrong to indoctrinate your children to believe the world was made in 7 days and other matters of bad science or that particular deities do or don't exist? And kids are paraded in public to espouse the "good values" their parents have taught them, whether it's feminism or religion or civic duty or politics or whatever else. (I could go on, but you get my drift.)

My mixed feelings is that I typically don't like putting kids in presentations, although obviously kids are taught their parents' values and it's perfectly valid for young girls to be taught feminist values versus just being molded by society and having all the typical hangups. Your kids are taught SOMETHING... so either they start with the framework parents give them or some other framework (from society, friends, church, TV, etc.)

Also, yeah, typically we put some restrictions on kids' speech because they naturally will push the boundaries, and we're looking for a common-denominator form of communication that won't detract people from their ideas. On the other hand, the point still stands that people often get offended by speech and other more cosmetic issues while conveniently ignoring larger problems they don't want to or don't know how to address. I can't find the reference now, but I think this same strategy was used before in Christian circles when it came to feeding the poor -- I think a few years ago I read a short circulated essay using swear words in combination with the homeless/starving and finished with, "And I bet that many of you are more upset that I used the F-word multiple times in this piece than the fact that these children are living on the streets without food." It's a valid point in itself.

I can see a debate springing up about having young kids in politic-socio videos versus just being raised that way (without participating in distributed videos), but the issues themselves still stand.

What types do you see the two downright condescending empowered women as being?

Is MBTI type even relevant here? Honestly?

 

[anastasiaromanova]

[MENTION=7280]Lark[/MENTION],

Eh. The video is absurd as much as it is anything else, and can thus be seen as meta-commentary on the state of decay as much as on anything else.

 

[Lark]

[MENTION=7280]Lark[/MENTION],

Eh. The video is absurd as much as it is anything else, and can also be seen as meta-commentary on the state of decay as much as anything else.

Really?

 

[Jaguar]

Frankly, I think people need to chill the fuck out regarding the f-bomb. No matter who drops it.

 

[anastasiaromanova]

[MENTION=7280]Lark[/MENTION],

Sure. Why not? It's obviously silly (among other things). The Barbie doll make-up, the crowns...

Little girls say fuck on the Internet and this causes a controversy but just google the filthiest key words you can think of for specific acts and find thousands of explicit images and videos of things humans could barely even imagine since the dawn of time in two seconds flat.

This is absurd. Everything in the new millennium is absurd. The Pandora's Box opened by this technology we, and the video makers, are communicating through isn't going to close and all the ills have already flown out. What is left is hope--the hope that we will be able to find some kind of equilibrium within the chaos; the chaos isn't going away.

And that's what makes it meta-commentary. Because it was made in and for the belly of the beast--interactive, decentralized, unfettered mass media.

Personally, I would not have participated in the making of the video but I see its being made as more on the side of potential equilibrium than chaos. The first step is to accept that we are where we are and there's no turning back. Then it's possible to have a positive affect on the way we go forward.

 

[Passacaglia]

I had mixed feelings.

Not sure of the ages. 5-8, perhaps? As far as "indoctrination" goes, parents are indoctrinating children with values in any family by that point. Is it wrong to indoctrinate your children to believe the world was made in 7 days and other matters of bad science or that particular deities do or don't exist? And kids are paraded in public to espouse the "good values" their parents have taught them, whether it's feminism or religion or civic duty or politics or whatever else. (I could go on, but you get my drift.)

My mixed feelings is that I typically don't like putting kids in presentations, although obviously kids are taught their parents' values and it's perfectly valid for young girls to be taught feminist values versus just being molded by society and having all the typical hangups. Your kids are taught SOMETHING... so either they start with the framework parents give them or some other framework (from society, friends, church, TV, etc.)

Also, yeah, typically we put some restrictions on kids' speech because they naturally will push the boundaries, and we're looking for a common-denominator form of communication that won't detract people from their ideas. On the other hand, the point still stands that people often get offended by speech and other more cosmetic issues while conveniently ignoring larger problems they don't want to or don't know how to address. I can't find the reference now, but I think this same strategy was used before in Christian circles when it came to feeding the poor -- I think a few years ago I read a short circulated essay using swear words in combination with the homeless/starving and finished with, "And I bet that many of you are more upset that I used the F-word multiple times in this piece than the fact that these children are living on the streets without food." It's a valid point in itself.

I can see a debate springing up about having young kids in politic-socio videos versus just being raised that way (without participating in distributed videos), but the issues themselves still stand.

You said it better than I would have!

I've been irked at the sight of children pushing their elders' ideologies in the past, and it might even be something that we as a society ought to reconsider, but the practice is nothing new.

Being a fan of the late George Carlin and the child of two feminists though, I don't find anything offensive or even off-putting about the video. I guess it's no surprise that it's gone viral though.

EDIT: Why is this thread in the philosophy forum? Just curious.

 

[Lark]

[MENTION=7280]Lark[/MENTION],

Sure. Why not? It's obviously silly (among other things). The Barbie doll make-up, the crowns...

Little girls say fuck on the Internet and this causes a controversy but just google the filthiest key words you can think of for specific acts and find thousands of explicit images and videos of things humans could barely even imagine since the dawn of time in two seconds flat.

This is absurd. Everything in the new millennium is absurd. The Pandora's Box opened by this technology we, and the video makers, are communicating through isn't going to close and all the ills have already flown out. What is left is hope--the hope that we will be able to find some kind of equilibrium within the chaos; the chaos isn't going away.

And that's what makes it meta-commentary. Because it was made in and for the belly of the beast--interactive, decentralized, unfettered mass media.

Personally, I would not have participated in the making of the video but I see its being made as more on the side of potential equilibrium than chaos. The first step is to accept that we are we are and there's no turning back. Then it's possible to have an affect on the way we go forward.

I'm not sure I agree with your definitions of either absurdity or meta and their application in this way.

I dont believe its necessary to accept this in order to move forward, I'm not even sure I know what's meant by that, are you sure you're not just tossing a whole bunch of words out here?

 

[anastasiaromanova]

Why is this thread in the philosophy forum? Just curious.

Why indeed. And why not?

Glossary Definition: Logos

 

[Totenkindly]

I'm not sure I agree with your definitions of either absurdity or meta and their application in this way.

I dont believe its necessary to accept this in order to move forward, I'm not even sure I know what's meant by that, are you sure you're not just tossing a whole bunch of words out here?

Are you actually going to provide a substantial answer?

This is yet another empty post where you're just tossing words out there to say (in effect) "you're wrong" without providing any actual content of your own to support your view or provide a viable alternative.

If you want to be part of the conversation, why not actually be part of the conversation?

 

[anastasiaromanova]

I dont believe its necessary to accept this in order to move forward, I'm not even sure I know what's meant by that, are you sure you're not just tossing a whole bunch of words out here?

It isn't necessary to accept it but it's moving forward on its own momentum whether we accept it or not. And I'm absolutely sure I am just tossing out a whole bunch of words, and so is everyone else who talks about the video, including the Young Turks, and also and especially the little girls, and that's the point--or one of them, anyway.

It's absurd. The people who made the video aren't the "die-hard, hard-core feminist extremists" some are claiming. For one thing the people who made the video have a sense of humor.

I'm completely neutral about the video. My 1-fixed, 4 line to 1, 6 @ 9 idiosyncracies.

 

[Lark]

Are you actually going to provide a substantial answer?

This is yet another empty post where you're just tossing words out there to say (in effect) "you're wrong" without providing any actual content of your own to support your view or provide a viable alternative.

If you want to be part of the conversation, why not actually be part of the conversation?

If you back and read my post, maybe take a minute to calm down and do so without all the emoting I've come to associate with your standard responses, and you'll see I did make points.

I questioned what was being said because it wasnt clear, it was hopelessly vague and therefore any discussion was impeded.

I'm sure you'll see that if you take a minute. Maybe not. I'm not hopeful.

 

[Lark]

It isn't necessary to accept it but it's moving forward on its own momentum whether we accept it or not. And I'm absolutely sure I am just tossing out a whole bunch of words and so is everyone else who talks about the video, including the Young Turks, and also and especially the little girls, and that's the point--or one of them, anyway.

It's absurd. The people who made the video aren't "die-hard, hard-core feminist extremists". For one thing they have a sense of humor.

I'm missing what's absurd here, perhaps its meant to be spoofing or satirical, in which case its in incredibly poor taste to try and make a point like that by enlisting children, as poor as if it were genuine political theatre.

I'm not sure what you're driving at about acceptance here, because its happening and will happen whatever way you feel about it, it deserves to be accepted?

You know what that sounds like? I'll let you think about it because its very unpleasant and I'm will to believe you didnt actually think about what that sounds like.

 

[anastasiaromanova]

I'm missing what's absurd here, perhaps its meant to be spoofing or satirical, in which case its in incredibly poor taste to try and make a point like that by enlisting children, as poor as if it were genuine political theatre.

I'm not sure what you're driving at about acceptance here, because its happening and will happen whatever way you feel about it, it deserves to be accepted?

You know what that sounds like? I'll let you think about it because its very unpleasant and I'm will to believe you didnt actually think about what that sounds like.

In recent decades, the more flagrantly permissive and uncensored the world has become, the more "politically correct" it has become. And the more politically correct it has become, the more politically and economically unfair it has also become in many ways. This video is, among other things, an implicit commentary on that absurdity. The contrast between the silly 1950's princess costumes and the fuck fuck fuck is absurd.

When I was 14, in 1973, I could go to discoteques and drink without being proofed for ID and buy cigarettes in any store (mind you I looked older, but clubs and stores never proofed). But I couldn't google teenage interracial anal gang bang to get my rocks off or walk around with my eyes glued to a phone texting about nothing 24/7 and cause traffic accidents. I knew--or thought I knew--I could also get a secure job with benefits and a pension when I was an adult If I wanted to, even though women's lib at that time was brand new.

This new age is absurd, dangerously so, and yes, I know what what I said sounds like to people who can hear me. It sounds like I'm realistic about just what this Juggernaut is that we're on and what the possibilities may be. And if you don't mind, I'd like to leave it at that. If you think I'm being complicitous in accelerating the decay of civililzation, so be it.

 

[Lark]

In recent decades, the more flagrantly permissive and uncensored the world has become, the more "politically correct" it has become. And the more politically correct it has become, the more politically and economically unfair it has also become in many ways. This video is, among other things, an implicit commentary on that absurdity.

When I was 14, in 1973, I could go to discoteques and drink without being proofed for ID and buy cigarettes in any store, but I couldn't google teenage interracial anal gang bang to get my rocks off or walk around glued to a phone "chatting" about nothing 24/7. I could also get a job with benefits and a pension If I wanted to.

I know what what I said sounds like to people who can hear me. It sounds like I'm realistic about exactly what this Juggernaut is that we're on and what the possibilities are. And if you don't mind, I'd like to leave it at that. If you think I'm being complicitous in accelerating the decay of civililzation, so be it.

Nawh, I dont think that