Bronwyn,

I think those magazines will be about as popular as those Happy to be Me dolls. The latest craze is that internet 'bimbo' game where girls can get a boob job, buy lingerie and take diet pills. It looks even better than the Slutz (Bratz) dolls. You'd love it!

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23433501-662,00.html

I don't think it's possible, or maybe not even always advisable, to politicise your children. You run the risk of them being an outcast in their peer group as a result of attempting to indoctrinate them with beliefs they have no chance of understanding.

Point taken about Vanilla though, I am not really generous enough. I spend my time arguing points and challenging people, but don't feel the need to waste my word quota on agreeing with people. I've discussed this with Vanilla before, and I respect her more than most of the people on here but that's more to do with her positions on things than how polite she is.

Bronwyn, thanks for the tip on the magazine. My youngest is almost 14. She's looked at the magazines targeted at her age group. As have her friends. I have no idea who buys them. The trendy, fashion conscious teenage girls I know find Dolly et al boring for a long time after having read one. 'They're all the same, just repeat the same stuff over and over'.

My daughter incidentally loved the boots in the ad, as did I, but it was not only me who found the ad strange.

Sorry Whitty for boring you. I'm thrilled to deduce from that that you are a thoroughly modern well adjusted man. As are my two sons and my husband. My children find some of my stories quaint as well. Anything further removed than 10 years is practically ancient. But I was mainly addressing Antiseptic who was black smithing, mucking out stables and what not. I tried to bring things back to at least the 20th century.

As to the Bimbo game. It looks limiting and boring. The graphics are appalling. Just that is insulting in itself. My daughter wouldn't give it the time of the day. After all the 'news' on it she had to check it out (so did I!) She's seen the possibilities of WOW etc. and played in other games. Better graphics, more choices, more fun. Surely it would only be very few girls with little imagination this would appeal to? Paper cut out dolls would be more fun.

Whitty

"I don't think it's possible, or maybe not even always advisable, to politicise your children. You run the risk of them being an outcast in their peer group as a result of attempting to indoctrinate them with beliefs they have no chance of understanding."

I find it a little bizarre (to toss back a word you threw at me once) that the fairly innocuous act of a mother providing her daughter with some light reading material to read if she so chooses could possibly be described as politicisation or indoctrination.

I understand the paramount importance of peer group accceptance, particularly for teenagers, but the logical extension of your argument is that parents should take a hands off approach and leave it to the peer group to shape their children's attitudes. I know it's a fine line to tread and it's often hard to get the balance right, but I think most parents would want their children to gain ideas from a range of sources.

I probably didn't sell the magazine very well. I think it's actually a lot trendier and more appealing than I made it sound.

I won't bore you with my views on the Bimbo game, you already know what they are. If it really was a Simpsons type tongue-in-cheek send-up of the bimbo lifestyle, it would have some value, but I'm not sure that it is. The creator's comment that "the goals for the bimbos are morally sound and teach children about the real world" is a definite worry.

You and I have different views on censorship and this issue of parents influencing their children's choices falls within the same parameters. To me, just as letting advertisers have complete sway over the images we're all subjected to, is to lose the control over the shaping of our community that citizenship should infer, so too are parents who leave their children's minds to the market and to peer group pressure abrogating their parental responsibility. In fact in light of the volume of unpoliced garbage out there these days it could well be described as child abuse.

Put away your peace pipes, SJF has arrived and the war is back on.

This is very impressive writing indeed, as emphasised by Vanilla’s “I'd love to hear your take on the ad, if it so pleased you to give it.”. We all agree on Vanilla’s generosity, but this kinda sent shivers down my spine, for it seemed to alert us to the presence of feminist royalty:

“I get irritated by the incessant portrayal of women as victims, in some kind of misguided attempt to appeal to men to improve their (women’s) lot.

Likewise, I’m perplexed at the constant attempts by men here to portray themselves as victims, in some misguided appeal to women to forget about rape, domestic violence and gender salary gaps.

I am also baffled by men's stubborn lack of awareness that the forces that guide their lives are controlled, not by women, but by rich, powerful men who view them (men) as expendable.”

Beautifully smooth, but a hard hitting “men are bastards”, just the same – rich bastards and dumb bastards, to be precise. If you’re thinking the first paragraph is some sort of self-criticism, then think again.

Like the cannon fodder that we are, we then frolic off to SJF’s pre-history lesson and of course that unforgettable quote "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Well, here’s one I can recall but unfortunately cannot attribute: The past is ignorant of the present. Be careful in taking its advice for it may just suggest new ways of going wrong.

No, wait, I’ve found a good quote on “the past” I can attribute:

AUTHOR:Vanessa Williams
QUOTATION:The past just came up and kicked me.
ATTRIBUTION:On losing Miss America title after Penthouse publication of nude pictures, People 6 Aug 84

Brillant Seeker,

SJF forgot to mention that rich men were dominated by rich women. I believe that is called high maintenance.

So in reality it was the alpha females that dominated the pack.

I remember reading somewhere that the wealthier men, were able to choose better quality partners, that poor men were not in the market.

One interesting article appeared that the very poorest of men had enforced celibacy.

So if men dominated women, how come the very poorest of men experience enforced celibacy?