----- Original Message -----
From: dana tierney
To: CF-Community
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 1:00 PM
Subject: Re:Superbowl Half-time clip?
is it back to where it all started? my point is that he isn't having sex with his mother, or contemplating doing so. The fact that we got here from a discussion of breastfeeding just proves my point.
I don't see the reason for the brouhaha. Janet Jackson has breasts, now that is a surprise :)
Dana
> Just to get this back to where it all started...
>
> You guys being squicked is just a cultural thing. Sex between mother
> and son was considered normal in ancient Japan according to a
> documentary I saw a few years ago. The mother in caring for her son
> and preparing him to become a man would initiate him.
>
> Hey, now tell me that it's ok - we're just a sexaully repressed
> country. Then tell me why mothers are upset because JJ showed her boob.
> It's all a cultural thing.
>
> - Matt Small
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Kevin Graeme
> To: CF-Community
> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 10:38 AM
> Subject: Re: Re:Superbowl Half-time clip?
>
>
> Well I'll admit that I was one that got squicked. But then again, I
> didn't
> participate in the original conversation.
>
> IMO a good zone of privacy between parents and siblings is at least
> one
> State away. ;-)
>
> -Kevin
>
> > I know, talk about reading way too much into something. I think the
> problem here is the apearance of "bed" in the same sentence as
> "mother"...
> just like Victorians used to cover tables completely, down to the
> floor
> because they had legs.
> >
> > Would you-all still consider this disgusting if the guy's mother
> were
> watching television on the couch instead of in bed?
> >
> > I agree that there needs to be a zone of privacy between sons and
> mothers... but I don't see that this necessarily violates it.
> >
> > my .02
> > Dana
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
