Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 6329696)

Ok, I'll bite.

Setting aside the fact that neither of these two young women represent the youth of their country in any real sense: I think Courtney is more worrying than Charlotte.

I like her. She is very sweet. But she plays to the 'little girl' sweetness. The thing with the bunny, the artificially high pitched voice.

I see in her a kind of infantilised sexuality.

Charlotte is coarse. Though much of what she talks about (getting so drunk she pisses herself, or vomits) is not much different to a kind of 'laddishness'. With lads, we roll our eyes and say they'll grow out of it. Boys being boys. It is more shocking when it comes from a young lady.

Now, I see a kind of innocence in Charlotte. More so in some ways than with Courtney, who seems to have a very clear idea of how to use every head tilt, leg lift and giggle to her advantage. But Charlotte is not infantilised, she is just young. And her body is a natural body, over which she has absolute control. Her sexuality is one of self-empowerment, it is not hidden behind pink princess naivety.

Of the two, to me, Courtney seems to represent a form of femininity that is deeply damaging to society. An unnatural physical shape achievable only through radical surgery; a sexuality founded in childlike helplessness.

Originally Posted by CynicalHermit (Post 6329703)

I maybe wrong, but are you suggesting that she is pandering to paedophilic ideals that are upheld by the male race?

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 6329715)

Great post again Dana, I agree, eventhough I quite like Courtney, I do think it's awful that she felt the need to do what she's done to her body at such a young age and also her marrying so young to an old man, with, preumably her parents consent? It's quite sad

Originally Posted by thediaryroomchair (Post 6329711)

Some of the youth in Britain today behave appallingly and have no respect for themselves and for their elders. I have a younger sister and she is an absolute credit, she worked hard in her GCSEs and BTEC and does not answer back and is very career minded. Unlike some I see in my local town who insult me for the team I support using four letter expletives to boot.

Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 6329717)

Incidentally, I think this points to a fairly fundamental misunderstanding of what is meant by the term patriarchy.

Men do not create the world for women. We, men and women, create the world for ourselves and each other. We are also created by that world. It is not a case of what men to do to women. But what we do to ourselves.

Originally Posted by Roy Mars III (Post 6329722)

I feel bad for her. I think she is another example of the price of fame. Her and her parents. You can't get married here intill you are 18 unless your parents okay it. No matter what she may have felt at the time, you can't make a decision like that at 16 IMO.

Originally Posted by CynicalHermit (Post 6329703)

I maybe wrong, but are you suggesting that she is pandering to paedophilic ideals that are upheld by the male race?

Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 6329728)

No, that's really not what I meant, CH.



The tradition of infantilised female sexuality is a very long one. In Christian cultures we have a strange dichotomy of respect for motherhood and disdain for female sexuality: Mary is both a mother (good) and a virgin (good). She is innocence and motherhood combined.

Originally Posted by MachoPoodle (Post 6329733)

Male race? What is that supposed to mean?

Originally Posted by MachoPoodle (Post 6329733)

Male race? What is that supposed to mean?

Originally Posted by CynicalHermit (Post 6329684)

So by your assumption all adults that are into toys, games, comics, anime etc are weird, right? Ok

Doesn't make it wrong. She is harming nobody.

I have seen nothing that suggests she is calculating in any way. Drawing that conclusion says more about you than it does her.


Two pennies short of a sixpence? She is 18 years old and a millionaire.

Originally Posted by sassysocks (Post 6329740)

You seem to be contradicting yourself - one minute she is 'innocent' and childlike - the next your comments about her age and financial status - by marriage - suggest she is calculating and knows exactly what she is doing, which is what the majority of people have thought all along.

She is simply conforming to an image that many men seem to find attractive and got her a very wealthy hubby. A sexy body together with an innocent and obedient mind seems to wreak havoc with male hormones. Many are intimidated by strong, intelligent women - hardly rocket science.

Originally Posted by CynicalHermit (Post 6329688)

No idea, using what she has to earn a living is not a crime. There are men out there stupid enough to line her pockets, so good luck to her.

Originally Posted by sassysocks (Post 6329745)

That is completely at odds with you comments of her being 'innocent'. So now porn stars are innocent. I don't think our definitions of 'innocent' are in tune.

Originally Posted by CynicalHermit (Post 6329742)

It does not suggest she is calculating, it suggests she is intelligent. A person can be both innocent and intelligent.

Originally Posted by CynicalHermit (Post 6329738)

Case in point.

Originally Posted by sassysocks (Post 6329751)

Your argument is all over the place and makes no sense. If as you suggest she is intelligent enough to pick a wealthy husband - that is calculating. Innocent people marry for love, not money.

Originally Posted by CynicalHermit (Post 6329753)

How do you know she didn't marry for love? Were you there?

Originally Posted by sassysocks (Post 6329767)

How predictable was that comment - evidence of your meandering arguments.

You were the one who said she was intelligent enough to be a millionaire at 18 - implying she knew exactly what she was doing. Bearing in mind the way she achieved that millionare status was by marrying a very wealthy man old enough to be her father- your words speak for themselves.

Originally Posted by CynicalHermit (Post 6329768)

How do you know the way she acquired her wealth was purely through her husband?

Originally Posted by sassysocks (Post 6329780)

Unless her family were wealthy or she had some kind of high profile 'career' (please enlighten) - then she married into money. Not complicated. If she did have a 'career' at 16 - what was it - glamour modelling or porn? Very innocent.

You can't have it both ways - all the evidence points to her either being very calculating or as thick as a brick.