Are you mature enough for Katy Perry on "Sesame Street"?

shack

I would like to play "dress up" with Katy Perry!

jflail2

After watching the video through, over-reaction on my part for sure.

Still, I kind of tire of the current "gosh we're so witty b/c we're toeing the line of vulgarity" mindset.

The first example to come to mind is that new Shatner show, $h*& MY Dad Says.

Really? Do we really need a title that obviously has **** in it? I can curse with the best of them, but I just don't see the need for this. Overkill in my mind I guess.

And do we really need a viagra commercial every 2 minutes during football games rambling on about 4 hour erections, etc?

I guess I wish my niece and nephew could be sheltered from anything along those lines until they're old enough to understand it/keep it in perspective. I know that's not going to happen, but it seems like childhood innocence ends earlier now than it ever did...

Oh well, all I have to worry about is myself in the end, so it doesn't matter what I think anyway.

bobman1235

jflail2 wrote: »

The first example to come to mind is that new Shatner show, $h*& MY Dad Says.

Really? Do we really need a title that obviously has **** in it? I can curse with the best of them, but I just don't see the need for this. Overkill in my mind I guess.

Technically that was them trying to "clean up" where they got the idea from : a Twitter feed called "**** My Dad Says." Why they didn't just go with "crap my dad says" or something I'll never understand. Now they're running into problems because most DVRs can't search for $#%@ . Serves ya right, dummies.

pmckeealaska

tonyb wrote: »

A bit extreme there bubba.

So tell me then, is there a line to cross when it comes to proper dress or do you advocate that none should exist ? If so, where do you draw such a line and by who's standards ? Hollywoods ? Lady Gagga's ?
Wear some speedo's and flipflops to work this week, let me know how that works out for ya. [ assuming your not a lifeguard of coarse]:)

I can answer this question (for myself at least). No...there should be absolutely no line! As a Libertarian, I believe in personal freedom first and foremost. I dont think there should be censorship of anything for any reason! If you as a parent think that the video in question was inappropriate then you turn the channel and dont allow your child to watch it!!!!! I dont need some corporation to make parental decisions for me. And to be clear, we're not talking about workplace attire here either. Thats a completely seperate issue. I will decide whats appropriate for my child to watch....noone else! Americans are just way too uptight about anything dealing with the human body. Remember the fiasco over Janet Jacksons "wardrobe malfunction"? That was completley assinine. Oh dear God, whats going to happen to our poor children if they see that dirty DIRTY breast, or worse.........the nipple! Horror of horrors. Bottom line...if you dont like something, turn the friggin channel!

shawn474

jflail2 wrote: »

Still, I kind of tire of the current "gosh we're so witty b/c we're toeing the line of vulgarity" mindset.

The first example to come to mind is that new Shatner show, $h*& MY Dad Says.

Really? Do we really need a title that obviously has **** in it? I can curse with the best of them, but I just don't see the need for this. Overkill in my mind I guess.

And do we really need a viagra commercial every 2 minutes during football games rambling on about 4 hour erections, etc?

I think the commercials that are on kids channels with violence, provocative stuff, etc. is out of place and agree that there is a lot of toeing the line in television that I would rather not subject my kids to. And the above post is spot on - the Shatner thing is ridiculous. It shows that writers and such have declined so much that they have to resort to the shock and awe tactic of getting viewership.

All that said, the Katy Perry clip is very benign in my opinion.

dudeinaroom

That's It, I'm moving to Europe so I can watch the nude news casts. I think America is the only county that finds baby food offensive. If women went shirtless and were never made to cover up we would not see them as sexual objects, but just as any other part of the body. They are not a sexual thing, they are food for babies. I think people need to grow up and stop acting like pubescent teen boys. I guarantee if you asked any kid who watched what they saw, they would tell you they saw a pretty lady in a dress singing with Elmo, and not wow man did you see how much cleavage she had. Really, I don't even think my 7 year old boy knows what cleavage is. He has seen my wife's breast many of times, she had breast fed all three of are children. It's not an issue for him, and it doesn't even draw his attention, he could careless, just like it was a normal part of life, oh wait it is.

pmckeealaska

dudeinaroom wrote: »

That's It, I'm moving to Europe so I can watch the nude news casts. I think America is the only county that finds baby food offensive. If women went shirtless and were never made to cover up we would not see them as sexual objects, but just as any other part of the body. They are not a sexual thing, they are food for babies. I think people need to grow up and stop acting like pubescent teen boys. I guarantee if you asked any kid who watched what they saw, they would tell you they saw a pretty lady in a dress singing with Elmo, and not wow man did you see how much cleavage she had. Really, I don't even think my 7 year old boy knows what cleavage is. He has seen my wife's breast many of times, she had breast fed all three of are children. It's not an issue for him, and it doesn't even draw his attention, he could careless, just like it was a normal part of life, oh wait it is.

Amen to that brother......

bobman1235

pmckeealaska wrote: »

I can answer this question (for myself at least). No...there should be absolutely no line! As a Libertarian, I believe in personal freedom first and foremost. I dont think there should be censorship of anything for any reason! If you as a parent think that the video in question was inappropriate then you turn the channel and dont allow your child to watch it!!!!! I dont need some corporation to make parental decisions for me. And to be clear, we're not talking about workplace attire here either. Thats a completely seperate issue. I will decide whats appropriate for my child to watch....noone else! Americans are just way too uptight about anything dealing with the human body. Remember the fiasco over Janet Jacksons "wardrobe malfunction"? That was completley assinine. Oh dear God, whats going to happen to our poor children if they see that dirty DIRTY breast, or worse.........the nipple! Horror of horrors. Bottom line...if you dont like something, turn the friggin channel!

While I mostly agree with your spirit, this is supposed to be "safe children's programming." It's what people turn the channel TO to avoid all the other stuff. So while I don't think THIS occasion merits complaint, in general there should be a line that the SESAME STREET PRODUCERS draw. I mean, if all of a sudden Oscar pulled out his nine and pistol whipped some ****, while that may be appropriate in the sense of "if you don't like it don't watch it" it's obviously not appropriate for a kid's show.

cstmar01

bobman1235 wrote: »

While I mostly agree with your spirit, this is supposed to be "safe children's programming." It's what people turn the channel TO to avoid all the other stuff. So while I don't think THIS occasion merits complaint, in general there should be a line that the SESAME STREET PRODUCERS draw. I mean, if all of a sudden Oscar pulled out his nine and pistol whipped some ****, while that may be appropriate in the sense of "if you don't like it don't watch it" it's obviously not appropriate for a kid's show.

haahhahahahahhhaa

that was good.

Toolfan66

pmckeealaska wrote: »

amen to that brother......

+++10000000000

dudeinaroom

bobman1235 wrote: »

Technically that was them trying to "clean up" where they got the idea from : a Twitter feed called "**** My Dad Says." Why they didn't just go with "crap my dad says" or something I'll never understand. Now they're running into problems because most DVRs can't search for $#%@ . Serves ya right, dummies.

WWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA love it.

pmckeealaska wrote: »

I can answer this question (for myself at least). No...there should be absolutely no line! As a Libertarian, I believe in personal freedom first and foremost. I dont think there should be censorship of anything for any reason! If you as a parent think that the video in question was inappropriate then you turn the channel and dont allow your child to watch it!!!!! I dont need some corporation to make parental decisions for me. And to be clear, we're not talking about workplace attire here either. Thats a completely seperate issue. I will decide whats appropriate for my child to watch....noone else! Americans are just way too uptight about anything dealing with the human body. Remember the fiasco over Janet Jacksons "wardrobe malfunction"? That was completley assinine. Oh dear God, whats going to happen to our poor children if they see that dirty DIRTY breast, or worse.........the nipple! Horror of horrors. Bottom line...if you dont like something, turn the friggin channel!

+1

wayne3burk

and just who is Katy Perry, anyway?

so i googled it and i guess she kissed a girl and someone didn't like it.... cause there's nothing wrong with her duet with elmo.

PhantomOG

I understand and agree with BOTH sides of the argument here. I don't think they needed to pull it. But I understand the reason why they did and don't see how them removing it somehow equates to the downfall of the US. If you want your kids to see cleavage, are we really that short of opportunities? It seems like people are pissed about someone else's moral values being pushed onto them... by arguing their values should be pushed the other direction!

pmckeealaska

Actually, I'm not trying to push my values on anyone. My position is just the opposite. I advocate for letting the individual, rather than a government or network, to decide what is or is not aceptable for their child to view. Parents should be allowed to parent their children!

jflail2

pmckeealaska wrote: »

Actually, I'm not trying to push my values on anyone. My position is just the opposite. I advocate for letting the individual, rather than a government or network, to decide what is or is not aceptable for their child to view. Parents should be allowed to parent their children!

Very true.

Sesame Street should also be able to cut whatever they deem to be inappropriate, even if it is seen as extreme by some of you. After watching it, I back pedaled on my knee jerk reaction, but I still think they have every right to choose to not air subject matter they deem to be "too mature" for their target audience. Even with this material NOT being too mature, I can still respect Sesame Street for erring to the side of caution in light of their target audience. They have every right to air whatever they please.

And I think we can all agree that Sesame Street is one of the few shows left that you can plop your kid down in front of and not worry about at all, which is a good thing this day and age.

I just don't see how this cuts into parents deciding what their kids should/should not see. If you want your kids to see big fat bouncy jugs, I can recommend a few hundred main stream shows that will satisfy that need....

PhantomOG

pmckeealaska wrote: »

Actually, I'm not trying to push my values on anyone. My position is just the opposite. I advocate for letting the individual, rather than a government or network, to decide what is or is not aceptable for their child to view. Parents should be allowed to parent their children!

But why can't each network/show make their own decisions as well? We're talking about one show (a children's show mind you), on one network making one decision.... this in no way equates to some mandated standard across any lines.

If someone decided to make a show or even a network that was too "prude" for you, you think they shouldn't be allowed to do so?

pmckeealaska

PhantomOG wrote: »

But why can't each network/show make their own decisions as well? We're talking about one show (a children's show mind you), on one network making one decision.... this in no way equates to some mandated standard across any lines.

If someone decided to make a show or even a network that was too "prude" for you, you think they shouldn't be allowed to do so?

There are already shows out there that i would consider prude, but thats not my point. The last two comments miss my point entirely. I'm not saying anything about what kind of programming a network should or shouldnt decide to make. I'm only saying that once aired, it should be up to the individual to decide whether or not they should view it. If there was programming that I considered prude and I didnt want to watch it, then it is I who makes this decision, not the network. Did Seasame Steeet not know who they were booking on the show when they got Kate Perry on there? Did they not see what she was wearing when they recorded that segment? The time to not air it was before they aired it...not in response to a bunch of uptight social conservatives who see Satan in a womans boobies!!

tonyb

I'm all for letting parents be the ones to parent, thats the way it's suppose to be. Everything has a place in society. You want to watch ****,there are channels for it, kids shows, same, but when you bill yourself as a childs show,you expect it to be appropriate for a kids viewing. You don't want to watch a **** channel and have a G rated movie playing either. There is a level of expectation in every catagory of television viewing, while the video itself certainly isn't bad, I would gather that wasn't a parents expectation of Sesame Street.

pmckeealaska

tonyb wrote: »

I'm all for letting parents be the ones to parent, thats the way it's suppose to be. Everything has a place in society. You want to watch ****,there are channels for it, kids shows, same, but when you bill yourself as a childs show,you expect it to be appropriate for a kids viewing. You don't want to watch a **** channel and have a G rated movie playing either. There is a level of expectation in every catagory of television viewing, while the video itself certainly isn't bad, I would gather that wasn't a parents expectation of Sesame Street.

Since there are parents on this thread who didnt object to it, I would say that they didnt have this level of expectation, especially given the fact that there was NOTHING innapropriate about the video....zero.

kevhed72

Who is Katy Perry? Am I safe Googling her name on a company computer?

tonyb

pmckeealaska wrote: »

Since there are parents on this thread who didnt object to it, I would say that they didnt have this level of expectation, especially given the fact that there was NOTHING innapropriate about the video....zero.

Obviously enough parents did object, hence the pulling of the video.

shack

tonyb wrote:

There is a level of expectation in every catagory of television viewing, while the video itself certainly isn't bad, I would gather that wasn't a parents expectation of Sesame Street.

Seriously...as a parent...there is nothing in that video that I would consider out of line for my girls to have watched when they were "Sesame Street" age.

shack

tonyb wrote:

Obviously enough parents did object, hence the pulling of the video.

The networks are so PC anymore that they buckle at even a whiff of controversy...It has nothing to do with the number of parent objections.

BlueFox

tonyb wrote: »

Obviously enough parents did object, hence the pulling of the video.

There will always be somebody objecting to something. Maturity and freedom requires us to say NO to these absurd objections. Otherwise, don't be surprised if head scarves and burqas become the norm.

AsSiMiLaTeD

bobman1235 wrote: »

I mean, if all of a sudden Oscar pulled out his nine and pistol whipped some ****, while that may be appropriate in the sense of "if you don't like it don't watch it" it's obviously not appropriate for a kid's show.

Awesome!

shack

If Katy had kissed Miss Piggy...would that have been appropriate?

PhantomOG

Can you guys really not see the irony in your comments? The FCC was NOT involved in this. You really want to say that people should NOT be allowed to raise hell, boycott, whatever else (within legal limits) and that tv networks should NOT be allowed to show programming they think will bring in the most revenue (by not pissing off whoever they CHOOSE not to)???? These are all FREE CHOICES. You are all advocating taking away someone else's FREEDOM.

PhantomOG

pmckeealaska wrote: »

Did Seasame Steeet not know who they were booking on the show when they got Kate Perry on there? Did they not see what she was wearing when they recorded that segment? The time to not air it was before they aired it...not in response to a bunch of uptight social conservatives who see Satan in a womans boobies!!

Who cares when the decision was made? As long as it was not something enforced BY LAW, it was done of free will. Like it or not, not everyone has the same values as you. And like it or not, companies have to deal with the consequences of everyone's differing opinions.

There is a HUGE difference between government censorship and self-censorship. Complain all you want about government censorship and I'll agree with you 100%. But yelling and screaming about private individuals/companies/networks practicing SELF censorship is just plain hypocrisy.

PhantomOG

From the article:

"We use parodies and celebrity segments to interest adults in the show because we know that a child learns best when co-viewing with a parent or caregiver. We also value our viewers' opinions and particularly those of parents. In light of the feedback we've received on the Katy Perry music video, which was released on YouTube only, we have decided we will not air the segment on the television broadcast of 'Sesame Street,' which is aimed at preschoolers."

And somehow this one tiny little incident equates to prudes taking over and ruining the country. :rolleyes:

nooshinjohn

shack wrote: »

If Katy had kissed Miss Piggy...would that have been appropriate?

They could have sung "I kissed a girl, and I liked it":eek: