Skip Nav
The Very Best Fall Date For Your Zodiac Sign
Game of Thrones
30 Game of Thrones Costumes For Couples Who Want to Rule the 7 Kingdoms Together
37 Creative Disney Princess Group Costumes
lizlee89 lizlee89 5 years
Ok; I'm not sure how this became me judging you when I was simply expressing my opinion. I will admit that I can see why someone wouldn't identify underage girls getting pregnant as "perverse," so I retract my opinion about that. However, I don't think it is "harmless," and I am surprised that other people do. I'm sorry that I offended you because I am more serious about these issues that most people, but let me try to explain myself. Many young girls look up to celebrities, whether they are stupid girls like Bristol Palin or Jamie Spears or wonderful actresses like Dakota Fanning. Unfortunately, even if they don't realize it, girls see what celebrities do and often replicate their behavior. Why do you think more and more girls dress like the Kardashians, have issues with sex, and/or get pregnant at a young age? Of course there are other factors such as bad parenting, poor economic conditions, lack of appropriate education, and tons of other things that contribute to the rise in girls growing up too fast or with emotional issues. Maybe those factors do have a greater impact than what we show on tv and in movies and magazines, but it doesn't mean that those things don't have an effect. If they didn't, then why do we blame media for the rise in body image issues nd eating disorders in girls? This is simply my opinion, but I do think it's a very big deal what is shown to the public. The more one sees something, the more one thinks it's normal. I'm not condemning girls who are sexually active at a young age or anything like that. I do. however, think that just because some people don't take Cosmo or Lindsay Lohan seriously doesn't mean that they aren't powerful tools of influence, especially for young people. I just think there should be a lot more good sense about what is shown to them...
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 5 years
Yeah I missed that somehow too xx, as for the Bristol & Jamie thing the choice was "perverse" or "Harmless," yes I did choose harmless. As in, yes it is a big deal but it is not perverse, I'm sure Bristol was old enough to understand what she was doing and I'm sure she did it of her own free will. And why does my "excuse" bug you? What makes you even think it's an excuse? NO ONE takes Cosmo seriously, and taking a sexually active, rich 17 year old off the cover won't change the content any way. I'm also curious what your solution is, Liz, since you're so quick to judge.
xxinfinitepleasurexy xxinfinitepleasurexy 5 years
While you raise many valid points, Liz; I completely disagree. Too bad you'll probably never see this comment.
lizlee89 lizlee89 5 years
my problem with relating young girls (by that I mean under 18) to sexual topics, whether we're talking seemingly "harmless" magazines or undoubtedly pervese things like putting kids in hooker costumes - where does it end? just like in Hollywood, pushing the envelope started with little things like showing women in their underwear (like in what was considered a very edgy scene in Psycho) to now where anything goes; including little girls being molested or women being violently raped in movies. unfortunately, people are stupid, and they are influenced by what they see on tv and in other forms of media (if that weren't true, then why is it such a big deal to show smoking in a movie?) - most people won't become rapists or molesters just by watching bad entertainment, but many men and women will grow up without a proper respect for sex, themselves, or the opposite gender because of how open everyone is about it. for example, just look at the poll about Jamie Spears and Bristol Palin becoming underage mothers - 54% or 783 people said it's harmless! is that what we've come to, that young, immature girls with stupid parents becoming responsible for a child is not a big deal?! what bugs me most is the excuses people give - it's not a big deal because they don't tale Cosmo seriously, or because they don't look at girls like that or the Kardashians as role models. you may not, but there are millions of girls who don't have good role models and are only shown examples of young people being irresponsible about sex, drugs, alcohol, violence, etc. - what do we really expect is going to happen; that they're not going to be influenced? the bottom line is that it's all a big deal, and just like media and advertisers and all people should be respectful and careful about what they say or show when it comes to different races, genders, or lifestyles, they should be even more careful and responsible about what kind of sexual and/or violent things are being shown (to adults and kids alike)...
xxinfinitepleasurexy xxinfinitepleasurexy 5 years
^Exactly. I was saying that this may have to be the one time I'll actually buy the magazine.
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 5 years
I don't take Cosmo seriously as a magazine for intelligent adults, so I don't see the big deal. It's not like they're sticking her on the front of Time.
xxinfinitepleasurexy xxinfinitepleasurexy 5 years
I really don't get the big fucking deal. Dakota is far more mature than 90% of the celebrities they feature. Megan Fox? Fergie? Marissa Miller? Jessica Simpson? Christina Algulera? Lindsay Lohan? ANY Kardashian? Dakota is far more well spoken and a better role model than all of them combined. Can we calm down now?
Disney Princess Halloween Costumes
Disney Princess Group Costumes
Sexy Last-Minute Costumes For Women
Sexy and Funny Costumes For Women
From Our Partners
Latest Love
All the Latest From Ryan Reynolds