(November 12, 2012 at 12:25 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Oh IDK, the venerable Ms. Spears definitely cashed in on the whole Lolita bit just a bit more like an old hand than the first offering.In fairness, Britney was 16-17 when that video was released. Before that she was a squeaky clean Mousketeer (perhaps not completely, there are too many rumors about what Disney does with their chid stars, and where there's smoke there is generally fire). But should 16-17 year olds be able to display their sexuality? Not that Ms. Spears wasn't a pawn to her producers, manager, and even her parents, but it is somewhat acceptable for a 16-17 year old to be a somewhat sexual being... However, 12? No way in hell. And agreed, Britney Spears isn't so much a singer, she's an entertainer... A subtle distinction.
(hell, at least she could dance....the other one looks like she's stoned or just plain lazy..gotta be crisp! lol)
I like to follow pop culture... It may not be the highest form of culture and that's worth following too, but pop culture shows how the vast majority of America thinks, what's acceptable or not, etc... That's worth keeping tabs on. I don't want to be a parent who is completely out of touch with what the kids are up to these days. Better to know and provide my own influence than to leave them to think crap like this is acceptable.
