Parents should set decent standards, try to set an example for their children and at least let them know where they stand on moral and ethical issues as more questions arise as they get older .
Big companies prefer to make money , not to make moral choices .
Don't expect this Government to stop the ROT .

Talking about ballroom dancing, the Viennese Waltz was regarded as outrageous and immoral by many when it was first introduced, because men and women who were not necessarily married [or even engaged for that matter] held each other in their arms. Prior to this, they generally just met in passing, in the Lancers or some other folk style dance.

And I'm old enough to remember how rock-n-roll was called the Devil's music and jiving was banned in most ballrooms. Now it's a set dance style in the World Championships Latin category.

And somewhere along the way, we had this old classic:
"But Grandpapa and Grandmama had never really met
When Grandpapa kissed Grandmama in the second Minuet."
I have a romantic turn of mind and I think that the full lyrics are delightful. But I have a sneaking suspicion that these words would have ouraged some people when they were first written.

http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=81118

Yes, times [and dress styles] change, don't they? But not if the more narrow-minded members of society get their way.

It's been an interesting journey, this one. Thanks Graham.

My basic view is the same as I hold for fast food: if it is legal, then the supplier should be allowed to advertise.

In the case of David Jones, the advertisments seemed to me to be right on target - if I had a daughter, I would expect pressure for me to fork out, followed by further pressure to be allowed to wear the stuff.

Fortunately, boys don't feel the same need to dress up. Nor do men, come to that.

It's a chick thing.

So is the campaign good? Bad? Wholesome? Unwholesome?

All in the eye of the beholder, I feel.

I cannot imagine anyone who is not already so inclined being swayed into the paths of unrighteousness by the garments in question. They seem to be about the same as were on display at my son's Year Six "Formal".

Girls of that age get off on that stuff. Boys of that age don't notice. Fathers get a shiver up their spine when first confronted, but soon get over it with some help from the girl's mother. Who treats the whole thing with an admirable sang froid.

Fashions change. I recall ladies' fashion in the sixties with particular fondness, in much the same way as my grandfather reminisced about the twenties. But all that suddenly exposed - nay, flaunted - flesh didn't turn me (or him) into a raging pervert.

So am I "making it up as I go along", in Boaz's most captivating phrase?

I don't think so. But then I am relatively unconcerned by the odd glimpse of a youthful knee, so I find the fuss remarkably pointless.

Just one point. How come philo, our resident prurient, disapproves of the burqa? I would have thought from the tone of the rest of his posts that he would welcome top-to-toe covering, to prevent inordinate stoking of his suppressed lusts. No?

Mmm, I think the issues that the report raised are two things -
1) Dress styles - why are companies making 'bralettes' for little girls aged six? And why are people buying them?
2) Modelling styles - the poses these kids are in, with the open lips, and 'glance' over the shoulder, and spread legs, are all classic model poses, which is why to some extent we havn't noticed them. To some extent, its just 'oh yeah, they're modelling', nothing suss. But when you stop to think about it, WHY are children's clothes being advertised with classically 'sexy' poses? Why are there things like a cardigan being shown over a bikini? Why not over a singlet top and shorts?
I don't think we need to have 'standards' for kids clothes, but talking about it is very important - why do people disapprove of blatantly sexist advertising? Because people spoke up and pointed out that it has some dodgy connotations.
I don't think that many people looking at these images 'see' paedophilia - I see little kids dressed up - but we do need to question why we've not noticed the sexualising of little kids.

And Boaz, the reason I was lamenting your judgementalism is not only in relation to homosexuality - it was in relation to your general attitude that EVERYTHING bad MUST be because of so-called "make it up as you go" morality. As a person who does not follow your faith, or indeed any formal faith, I get very irritated at constant calls to 'return to the church and then all will be well' - I live a 'good' life, I do community work, donate to charity, pay taxes, obey the law. I resent the implication that doing so without a faith somehow means I am helping to erode the ethical character of society. And for the record, I currently live in Canberra, and as yet, have not found myself corrupted by the presence of pornography.
Heh. Sorry, that turned into a bit more of a rant than anticipated. Maybe I should "take it outside" :)

Pericles,
Obviously you missed my point. Clothes are not to distract from the real person wearing them. Too little flaunts suggestion not welcome or too much hides the true character of the person. Good dress sense is not a distraction or a hinderance to a good relationship with the person. Good dress highlights the character of the person, and is not of itself the focus of a relationship.

Rex.. on the Viennise waltz... this kind of confirms my point.

Once something is accepted, we know the boundaries, and can live within them. When I used to be bussed off to Lowther Hall or St Micheals as a young RAAF apprentice to learn ball room dancing, I didn't really think so much of the personal male female contact in a salubrious way. I just thought it was nice to be able to meet a nice girl, and the dancing simply facilitated a structured and allowed means of getting to know them.

The problem comes when people with a vested interest suddenly want to 'push' those accepted boundaries.

Ludwig.... making laws is only workable to a point mate. When it comes to dress styles, bathing costumes etc..
There are always those who want to be 'different' and are prepared to stir until they get their way.

For this reason, I think we are consigned to 'dynamic' culture. Waxing and waning according to the impact by various opinion leaders and agents of change. Some will seek to liberalize and others to conserve.

C.J. you love hammering me on BB don't u :)
I see it as an important social issue, not an obsession.

Pericles "If it's legal, it should be advertizable" ? Well the personals section in even the local rags certainly testifies to that. Amazing stuff.

Just imagine the 6.00pm news Ad "Come.. all Caltex servo's now have a new range of HOT Porn"

Or.. "All Ampol service stations have a 25% off sale on all Porn"