0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Just to make it clear, i was not trying to compare Mj to Lady Gaga, i've used MJ's pictures only as an example, i could use other singer's pictures but i decided to use his pictures because i'm sure we are all more familiar to them. I don't think MJ is pornographic either Lady Gaga, both are just artist and they perform for adults, her songs are for adults and i'm almost sure that there is a "parental advisory" on the cover of her CDs ( i'm not sure because i have none ).I'm NOT attacking Michael. Remember what happened with Michael's "BOW" video, do you think it was fair?, Lady Gaga is not " he little mermaid" she doesn't perform for children.
Quote from: "Loveneverfeltsogood"In my opinion this article is retrograde, sexist and extremely conservative, I wonder what right-wing religious group is part of the person who wrote it.Can anybody explain me why this picture is pornographic? What about this one? What is the big difference?Let’s compare a few more pictures. She is pointing to her…omg she is a b*tch!! And He is a slave of the rhythm, a genius!! Another one: She is half naked…what a shame!! :shock: And…He is so cute and sexy!!! This one What is she doing? I hope my daughter never will be like this! :evil: And… I hope my son some day will be like Beckham!!! My point with this post is that the article is obviously sexist, the problem is that if a woman is sexually liberated ( or aggressive ) is a pervert filthy and is the end of the world!!! But if a man does the same is just provocative and... omg he is so sexy!!!Another thing that I would like to point out from this article is about this sentence: “Boys expect certain sexual ‘services’ from their girlfriends that were once the province of prostitutes.”, Can anybody tell me what kind of services are province of prostitutes? :roll: Does it means that a woman/girl can’t do whatever she wants with her boyfriend or husband because she would become a prostitute?I can understand that parents wants to protect their children, but I think is so unfair to blame Lady Gaga, Madonna or another singer, their videos are for ADULTS. If parents goes to a Pussycat dolls concert with their kids, whose fault is it?Anyway I can see the link between the general idea of the article and Illuminati-NWO.Sorry, But I just think we're fans of Michael mainly because of his talent and his sensitivity to compose music with intelligent lyrics with meaning or romantic or humanitarian message of faith and hope! Of course he also sometimes used of sensuality in their clips and shows, I give the example of the song "Give in to me" is one of my favorite and he uses a lot of sensuality in the lyric, it also has the sexual appeal, but it is mild, it is sexual and romantic at the same time ... he knows the voice balance between an aggressive tone and sentimental. The same happens in "In the closet." Michael dancing with his hand on p. .. OK, but we never saw him in explicit sex scene, he never trivialized sex. He was almost naked in the clip with Lisa, but for me that scene is much more romantic than sexual. The problem with these artists that Mo told is that it is present in all the clips and lyrics .... no content, it is sometimes embarrassing to watch. I do not think a kiss between two women in public can be compared to normal between a man and woman And if you pay close attention not only banal they encourage sex, it's much worse!
In my opinion this article is retrograde, sexist and extremely conservative, I wonder what right-wing religious group is part of the person who wrote it.Can anybody explain me why this picture is pornographic? What about this one? What is the big difference?Let’s compare a few more pictures. She is pointing to her…omg she is a b*tch!! And He is a slave of the rhythm, a genius!! Another one: She is half naked…what a shame!! :shock: And…He is so cute and sexy!!! This one What is she doing? I hope my daughter never will be like this! :evil: And… I hope my son some day will be like Beckham!!! My point with this post is that the article is obviously sexist, the problem is that if a woman is sexually liberated ( or aggressive ) is a pervert filthy and is the end of the world!!! But if a man does the same is just provocative and... omg he is so sexy!!!Another thing that I would like to point out from this article is about this sentence: “Boys expect certain sexual ‘services’ from their girlfriends that were once the province of prostitutes.”, Can anybody tell me what kind of services are province of prostitutes? :roll: Does it means that a woman/girl can’t do whatever she wants with her boyfriend or husband because she would become a prostitute?I can understand that parents wants to protect their children, but I think is so unfair to blame Lady Gaga, Madonna or another singer, their videos are for ADULTS. If parents goes to a Pussycat dolls concert with their kids, whose fault is it?Anyway I can see the link between the general idea of the article and Illuminati-NWO.