I apologize for putting the images against nature into others' heads. That was rude of me. Specially when I had promised to only use my powers for good.

I'm late to the table on this, and it was covered a bit in Natter, I think, but I am so aggravated by these jackasses freaking out about Dakota Fanning and the movie "HoundDog".(Article here if yo have no earthly idea what I'm talking about: [link] )

Know what, assholes? Rape of an adult woman is just as illegal as the rape of a child and it is still shown in films. A lot. And a lot more graphic than the scene in HoundDog, from what I've read.

You don't want to see it, don't go see it.

---

I thought about death a fair amount even in toddlerhood. Is that normal?

My childhood was cold war time when many of my friends had bomb shelters in the basement. Between that and scores of elderly relatives having wild and crazy Irish wakes I thought about it some. Grateful that fear has never been a part of those thoughts.

I have to agree with you on that Aimee. Particularly this part

Rape of an adult woman is just as illegal as the rape of a child and it is still shown in films. A lot.

I wouldn't watch it because I would find it upsetting. I won't watch VM anymore because it is too common a theme there too. But the uproar over this film is nuts. If groups want to put the film on their banned list go for it. But it doesn't sound at all to me like the subject matter was presented in an inapropriate manner.

(lets see how many xposts while I typed and did a zillion things) Wow! None, guess I'm not the only one working. 3 edits with the spelling stuff!

---

note to self: when apologizing for putting horrible bad images into people's heads, don't follow it up with discussion of child rape. Just FYI.

t sprinkles glitter

---

Yay glitter! Of course if you were really sorry you would offer chocolate too.

---

But it doesn't sound at all to me like the subject matter was presented in an innapropriate manner to me.

Exactly. It's real life. It's one of the ugliest, most horrific, horrible, awful, disgusting parts of life, but it's there. If one child sees the movie and maybe they find the courage to make it stop happening to them from the movie, then good movie.

---

Cindy! I had a dream about Ben last night! I was in an elementary school gym, looking for my seat, when I ran in to my college roommate. We were chatting, and then this dance recital began, and Ben & his friend did a cute as hell dance to "The Future's So Bright, I Gotta Wear Shades". I didn't see you or your DH there, so I was cheering extra-loud for him, when a mom came over and asked me how I knew Ben. I explained about the whole Internet friend thing, she smiled and said she had heard about us and that she was the mother of B's friend, and that you were at something for Chris and your DH was at something for Julia, so she was watching Ben. And then the three of us women and the boys met up with all y'all at a restaurant.

That's so funny, juliana. If Ben were to do a dance anywhere, I think I'd skip Chris and/or Julia's thing, though. Report cards come out tomorrow, so let's see if your dream musical choice was accurate down to the lyric.

Know what, assholes? Rape of an adult woman is just as illegal as the rape of a child and it is still shown in films. A lot. And a lot more graphic than the scene in HoundDog, from what I've read.

I couldn't read too much, because a lot of that article made me head-bangy, but I think the objections were centered around using the child-actor to film the scene, rather than a body double. An adult is, in theory, more free and better prepared to make the choice to take the role, etc.

I hope I wouldn't let my child be in a scene like that, at that age, but I don't know how up in arms I could/would get about it, either, because I haven't seen the particular scene in question, and am unlikely to, given the subject matter.

---

Also, I want Hazard Pay for having to be my emotionally fragile sister's therapist. Especially when she calls me AT WORK to calm her down.

I can always calm her down, but then it's me that's upset. I wish this awful situation would just resolve itself somehow.

Zenkitty, it's really hard to tell family "No," but I believe that it's perfectly acceptable to tell you sister something like, "Sis, I hate what you're going through, and I want to be supportive, but because my workload has increased, when you call me at work I can't give you the kind of attention and feedback that you need. I'll call you tonight after dinner."

You're not abandoning her this way; you're just setting and protecting your boundaries. You're not saying that you won't lend an ear; you're just stipulating *when.*

The professional kind, that she refuses to get "because she doesn't need it and besides, she has me".

See, the next time she says this, you ought to reply with, "Sis, I'm flattered that you think so highly of my listening skills, but I'm not a trained professional. You'd really get much more help if you saw someone who has experience in these areas."

I *know* that it's MUCH easier said than done, but it *is* possible. You can help your sister without letting it suck all the life out of you.

---

I think the objections were centered around using the child-actor to film the scene, rather than a body double.

This is what I understand as well. Though from what I've heard about Dakota Fanning, she's no typical kid. I think she insisted on doing the scene.

---

I think though, that it would depend on how the film was shot. The article said that there is no nudity and the only thing of Fanning you see is her face and a hand, I think.

As far as letting Em or any other kid of mine do it, it would depend. Dakota Fanning has been an actress for a pretty long time for someone her age. She's grown up in the film industry. And, this isn't the first time she's played this type of roll. She played the victim of child abuse in an episode of CSI when she was about 7.

---

I think though, that it would depend on how the film was shot.

Absolutely, and this is why I'm probably not going to get my knickers in a twist over it, because I probably won't even see the finished product.

The article said that there is no nudity and the only thing of Fanning you see is her face and a hand, I think.

Yes. Although I think that was the objectors point, too -- why couldn't they use someone else in the scene.

Whatever. There are a lot of real rapes going on, every minute, and they're much more concerning.

---