Comment threads have an inter­est­ing life of their own; for instance last month I posted on Nickelodeon’s forth­com­ing Naked Brothers Band, and in the com­ments was passed along a link to this YouTube video. It’s a promo piece for the show and includes an inter­est­ing turn of events. Below is a still image from that video.


The image is pre­cisely what it looks like: An eight-​​year-​​old boy has his face vir­tu­ally nes­tled in a woman’s cleav­age. As depicted in the video, the act is meant to be (prob­a­bly) innocently-​​amusing, but it strikes me as being a lit­tle off — to say the least — that a “babysit­ter” would be made such an obvi­ous erotic focus.

This sea­son of South Park included an episode in which Ike, Kyle’s brother, becomes sex­u­ally involved with his school­teacher. This is flatly impos­si­ble, of course, because Ike is in Kindergarten, but the intent of the show was to high­light the hypocrisy of a soci­ety that decries molesta­tion of girls or boys by men, but seems to sup­port it when the per­pe­tra­tor is a woman, par­tic­u­larly an attrac­tive one. (They prob­a­bly also wanted to push the age down so far in order to get view­ers really think­ing about the idea of too young, and when they think too young is … well, too young.)

Part of the prob­lem was that when­ever Kyle tried to report the act, the men he was talk­ing to (cops, school author­i­ties, etc.) would ask for details, then reply with some­thing along the lines of, “Whoah … she was doing what with him? Niiiiice…

Kyle’s point was that whether Ike’s teacher was “hot” or not, whether the teacher was a woman or man, should make no dif­fer­ence. She had no busi­ness doing what she was doing.

Look at the above image again and ask your­self if you’d find it any­where near as amus­ing if it was an eight-​​year-​​old girl shown prac­ti­cally rub­bing her face against the groin of a Chippendale’s dancer … or, for that mat­ter, if it were the same boy with said dancer.*

And ask your­self again what the hell Nickelodeon thinks it’s doing, and whether, as some respon­dents on the other thread have sug­gested, I’m unaware of what I’m talk­ing about.

Update: A fol­lowup post on the other thread pointed to another video which fea­tures our bosom-​​obsessed skin-​​pounder ask­ing ques­tions such as, “Does ‘alien­ate’ mean ‘squeeze boo­bies’?” The obses­sive way the boy returns to the ques­tion, cou­pled with the poorly-​​performed “wild hilar­ity” of the other boys in the room, makes me won­der why it is that this misog­y­nis­tic sequence was scripted into the show at all.

Between the clingy focus on sex (too young) and the clear mes­sage that the only thing about women that mat­ters is “boo­bies”, all I can do is hope this benighted trav­esty of an “enter­tain­ment” will die a very silent — and com­plete — death.

What’s par­tic­u­larly bizarre about all of this is that Nick appears intent on run­ning this series — even though it was just fif­teen years ago that Pee-Wee’s Playhouse was can­celled because a man named Paul Reubens was caught mas­tur­bat­ing in a porno the­ater … and the fall­out from the 2004 Super Bowl déba­cle is appar­ently of lit­tle con­cern to the bot­tom–feed­ers lin­ers at Nickelodeon HQ.

* Apart from sug­gest­ing that busty women are merely sex­ual play­things for boys, this scene seems to be legit­imiz­ing the idea that an eight-​​year-​​old boy can have a sex­ual or demi-​​sexual rela­tion­ship with a grown woman. Does any of this seem okay?


No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.