Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (49680)	6/8/2002 4:12:59 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I agree. Girls are introduced to Barbie much earlier than to computer porn. They spend much more time with her. She is approved by their parents, so presumably they assume that their parents approve of her body shape and think it's admirable. Much more impact than the occasional porn they might run across at the internet in the library.

To: epicure who wrote (49680)	6/8/2002 4:28:10 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I agree that Barbie, because it is so pervasive, no doubt becomes more internalized as a model for little girls than "occasional" porn. I think Barbie has little impact on developing boys... Though when we were in Seattle, my grandson's little 5 year old playmate saw his sister's new Barbie, and exclaimed, "Ohhhhhhh, she's beautiful!"... Evolutionary biology speaks. I don't know how highly "occasional" porn is, for children, pre-adolescents and adolescents, boys especially, but boys and girls. I suspect not very occasional in many, many cases. Millions and millions, I suspect. N says studies have been done in Europe on the effects of porn on children. I'm not going looking because I'm not going to give it the time, and I'm not clicking on those sites and getting on their mailing lists.