Pelican, I have actually commended MTR on my blog for her attention to the sexualisation of children, and acknowledged that in this area she is doing something that must be done.

I wasn't offended by the Calvin Klein ad, I thought it was stupid. For something to be offensive on a level other than the aesthetic, it has to stir an emotion in me correspondent to the scene it is attempting to depict. Otherwise it's empty and boring.

I don't know if the ad inspired young men to rape - did and does the famous painting of a naked woman in the forest surrounded by clothed men inspire rape? (Manet's Le dejeuner sur l'herbe)

I wasn't for a moment suggesting that women *deserve* to be sexually assaulted if they are senseless with drink. There's no morality attached to this. Young women have to know the dangers inherent in certain situations, just as I wouldn't expect to walk over broken glass without cutting my feet.

The perspective on human sexuality and female bodies brought to the argument by Christian sexual conservatives is based on an assumption that there is something inherently wrong with human sexuality and the body, outside of the privacy of the marriage bed. I don't agree with this, and I think it has to be rigorously contested as often as possible.

Some of our most éducated'are actually among the most immoral. With few decent female role models in prominant postions its no wonder our girls follow their examples.

Pelican

You are displaying some of the malicious misinterpretation that is far too typical of the "never blame the victim" crowd. The objections to the display of cleavage related to the fact that the model was also an actress who is best known for her role as a teenager and that the photoshoot made her look too sexual. No-one is suggesting that women with cleavage out deserve to be raped.

benk I refute the accusation that I am a malicious person. You don't know me and I suggest if you cannot read my posts properly without misinterpretation then please avoid them to avoid upsetting your sensibilities. You only have to read OLO on occasion to see that SOME men do believe that dress code or state of drunkeness means permission. Please look back at many articles on this subject before launching into an unfounded attack.

As for the cleavage remark, I have no idea what story that related to, I was talking in terms of taking responsibility (both genders) for one's own behaviour. I have not issue with cleavage just that it is a double edge sword ie. one person's freedom is for some an invitation or apology for rape. In no way was I generalising about all men. I would be much more content with cleavage being perceived as the norm rather than an exception.

"The perspective on human sexuality and female bodies brought to the argument by Christian sexual conservatives is based on an assumption that there is something inherently wrong with human sexuality and the body, outside of the privacy of the marriage bed. I don't agree with this, and I think it has to be rigorously contested as often as possible."

Jennifer you have no argument from me regarding your comments above, but sometimes I wonder if any comment from some public figures, including MTR, on standards in advertising for example, tends to invite the charge of "something wrong with human sexuality" when that is not the intent.

I am a Melinda TR fan. Someone has to take on the status quo, and she seems to be making a good attempt in an absolutely huge arena. If someone doesn't open the issues for discussion, there is a fair chance we will not be thinking about such issues, and merely mindlessly aquiesing to lower standards in many areas, or throwing up our hands and despairing about what to do when something comes into our sphere and has an unwanted effect on someone we care about.. For Melinda not to say something would be comparabe to the person who observes the frog on the stove in the lukewarm water and fails to let it know that the gas is on very low underneath it..Being cold blooded, the frog has no real concept of the increasing water temperature and will sit there and boil to death....Poor frog. I think he would rather have been told....

Melinda is not correct in every thing she says.
That is a given, as she is a mere mortal, and hence falible.

The fact is, she is having a go.

Is society in general ok with a major department store mixing metaphors in their advertising that included lap dancng, santa claus and getting your family photo done for your christmas letter? That came up one Sunday afternoon.. and was off air with an apology within a few hours..
I commend her for her work.

It might be piecemeal, but she is finite.
Maybe if more people took on the status quo there would be a greater consistency.
One person can only do so much.
She has my support.

If I am drunk and driving a car, am I not responsible for any accident?

If I am drunk and assault someone, am I not responsible for my actions.

But then as a male I become responsible for the actions of a female who may have exceed .05.

Don't think the cops would take to kindly to breath testing prospective amours.