:
|
Oh, come on. They didn't even show any cleavge or nipples. I, for one, was very disappointed.
|
Actually, they did.
WoF: You're disgusted that I continued the argument in public that began in public? Let's not be a hypocrite. I have to wonder how your brother would feel about all of your conversations being aired here without his knowledge.
And do not make this like I'm calling you a pedophile. You know that I'm not. I merely got fed up, and yes, disgusted by your absolute lack of objectivity in the matter. I'm offended that your constant answer is that I don't understand. Whether you blame my ignorance on cultural differences or stupidity doesn't matter. You feel confident that my opinion can be ruled out because "I don't get it".
You claim that the nudity is there to show innocence. Well, let's look at that objectively. Nine year old girls are body conscious. If you force a nine year old to stand naked in a group of her peers or adults she is likely to start crying. If you do the same with a four year old it is likely to start laughing and trying to show off it's peepee area. Showing a four year old running around in the nude can very easily be written off as art showing innocence. Also, if it was meant to show her innocence then why is she trying to cover herself? That doesn't make any fucking sense.
I understand that this isn't what you take from it. But it's so obvious from an objective stand point that their intentions are not what you want them to be. Call me a dick. Call me pathetic. But I can't continue having conversations with someone who I currently feel little more than frustration for. I don't feel frustration for you because you watch this. I feel frustration for you because you rationalize without looking objectively. Which is exactly what your brother does.