[MMM]

Yay for dad. He's fighting for the right for his little girl to learn how to dress for a world where a "reporter" appears on TV in a skin-tight bodycon dress that yes, distracted me from the actual story, despite her standard concerned-slightly-outraged, staccato "keeping it professional" reporter-speak signaling that this thot is indeed part of the media. Kudos to all who got past all that and noticed that the dad was on camera, and that he was wearing a ring.

9/10 will fap to to the image of me bending her over in that dress while she continues to hold the microphone and stare into the camera, saying in her I Wanna Be Taken Seriously As A Reporter voice: "Live from the scene, as MMM is entering my nether regions, back to you at the news desk - ooooooh baby, I like that."

[britchard]

Well well well... I can't say I'm surprised to see that the father is a Mason. Masons are intrinsically linked with the destruction of society, the prime example being that they were the driving force behind the French Revolution which was in some ways the big first win for the globalists as it lead to a certain banking family making a fortune in the Napoleonic Wars in the years that followed.

Most Masonic lodges are built for the purpose of worshiping Lucifer/Satan. As AB said, the showing of the ring is by design, not by accident. Most people won't notice it, but him showing his ring alerts other Masons to get behind his cause and support him.

[Leonard D Neubache]

So subtle with the camera work!



If any of us were found taking footage of a 13 year old girl from that angle then we would be charged with a sex crime.

This is quite literally a standard intro type shot for a porno.

[Dalaran1991]

Fathers whoring out their daughter, common practice circa Rome 150 AD.

I wonder if the girl herself is aware at all of what is really at stake.

But again, this is nothing new. My girl is very petite so she often shop in the teen departments. She got a hot black mini-skirt off a 13-years old rack, tried it on. The skirt hugs her form perfectly and make her ass look glorious.

This is pretty insidious, because the same it's not true for boys. It's pretty hard for smaller men to shop in the children section because the cut of the clothes is different and you can tell it's children clothing right away.

This skirt my girl got however, it has very sexual outline, it hugs a round ass perfectly then taper off at the ends to hug the thigh and the waist nicely. Creates the perfect hourglass figure for lower body. It's as if they took some skanky skirt from Forever 21 and reduced the overall size by 70% while keeping the exact proportion. A 13 yo wearing this would fit in perfectly in a nightclub as the usual petite girl without anyone asking for her ID. Happened at least a couple of time based on 2nd hand accounts I heard.

Still glad she got it for 30% of the price for an adult skirt though.

I'm just thankful yoga pants still aint that popular in French highschool as yet.

[Leonard D Neubache]

I think we could have squarely called this issue back when they started marketing g-strings for pre-teens.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ldren.html

Quote:

Outrage as Argos sells G-strings for children

High Street chain Argos has been branded irresponsible for promoting a range of sexually provocative lingerie designed for primary schoolgirls.

The underwear, which includes tiny G-string pants and padded bras, is advertised in the store's catalogue for girls aged between nine and 16.

The Tammy range, sold for as little as £5 for a pack of four thongs, also includes a 'loveheart' underwear set in pastel pink and thongs with I Love Me emblazoned on the front.

In addition to being displayed in Argos catalogues, the lingerie is sold in Tammy, the nationwide High Street children's store.

A leading psychologist who works with sex offenders said the clothing could encourage child abuse. Experts claim that the provocative underwear, normally worn by adults, could mean children inadvertently send out signals that would put them at risk.

Consultant forensic psychologist Richard Beckett said: 'Clothing like this can potentially trigger unhealthy interests in children. Unfortunately, there is a group of individuals in society, and it's not just men but women too, that has particularly disturbing attitudes towards children and their sexuality.'

'Parents need to be aware of the connotations,' he added. 'Whereas they might perhaps see the clothing as a bit of fun, the underwear will not necessarily have the same connotations for other adults.'

Last night there were calls for the brightly coloured lingerie, displayed on washing lines draped with fur boas and feathers, to be removed from catalogues and banned from stores.

Tory MP Ann Widdecombe said she was appalled. 'This is the next step in the destruction of children's innocence-Let's get them taken off the shelves. Of course underwear like this will lead to more abuse of children. The children who wear it won't realise the effect they will have. I appeal to mothers to protest to Argos.'

Michelle Elliott, director of children's charity Kidscape said she was shocked that Argos had included the range in its 2002 spring/summer catalogue.

'Underwear like this is totally inappropriate. Argos should have more sense and behave more responsibly. I don't know what they are thinking. Nine-year-olds don't need thongs and padded bras,' said Ms Elliott

Television personality and children's campaigner Esther Rantzen, who heads the child protection charity ChildLine, said the slogans printed on the garments were particularly irresponsible.

'We believe anyone selling or marketing clothing to children and young people has a responsibility to bear in mind the welfare and best interests of those children,' said Miss Rantzen.

'ChildLine would urge manufacturers and retailers to think carefully about the messages their clothes send out to and about the children who will be wearing them.'

A spokeswoman for Argos denied that the underwear was inappropriate, saying that it was a fashion item children wanted to wear.

Marks & Spencer was forced to discontinue a range of children's satin lingerie several years ago after harsh criticism from the NSPCC.

[Samseau]

(09-19-2017 09:01 PM)911 Wrote:  

A Greek Orthodox father has fought back, doing the opposite of what that pervy Bay Area dad did:

https://www.henrymakow.com/2016/10/Fathe...Board.html

If you follow the links in that story, we see that the father sued and got destroyed. Not only did the courts rule the parents have no rights over what the children learn in school (they said the parents can just take them out of schools if they don't like it) but also they put all of the school board's lawyer fees against him, totally up to 1 million dollars.

Fair and balanced system. Why are we allies with Canada again?

[Aurini]

(09-20-2017 10:34 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Fair and balanced system. Why are we allies with Canada again?

Canada is more abusive to its citizens, doing whatever it wants without redress or apology; breaking into homes and stealing guns during the flood a few years back, for example.

At the same time, the Canadian government trusts its citizens more than the United States. It's less prone to corralling and spying upon them.

Wherever you go, the noose is tightening.

[Rob Banks]

(09-19-2017 06:06 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

I seriously doubt we're getting the full story; this is the massaged truth. I'm sure there were plenty of parents disgusted with these antics which they didn't mention.

Also, don't you love the rhetorical flip, where his neighbour has body issues to this day because she wasn't allowed to go to school half-naked? How dressing your daughter conservatively is now what turns her into a sex object?

This.

The father doesn't see the irony in saying "They're not supposed to be sex symbols at 13. They're just kids." while fighting to allow his daughter to sexualize herself at 13.

[Rob Banks]

(09-19-2017 08:09 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

I was thinking the exact same the other day. This summer I've seen a ton of young girls not even in puberty wearing really low cut shorts indistinguishable from adult fashion.

Ah, but you see, if you point this out, then you are the creep sexualizing prepubescent girls.

Or so the leftists claim.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

I did some background checking on this family and my feeling is that this story was a bid to attract an agent to get a reality TV program. The dad is rich -- or at least pretends to be. The daughter has the kind of name you only give girls when you want them to have lots of attention.

If their attempt was to be the new Kardashians, they failed because this story came and went in Sept. 2017. But then, this might just have been a prelude to their big media push when the girl hits high school.

Keep in mind that odd things happen every day to people. But it takes a special kind of attention whore to want to put their personal life in the media.

The question to ask isn't "Why is dad doing this?" Because parents do all sorts of strange sh*t. The question is: "Why did dad want this in the media, where his daughter will be seen as a proto-slut for all eternity when people Google her name?"

Don't be surprised if you hear from these two again when they're involved in some other "controversy" they immediately take to the press.

[The Alpha Virgin]

I'm not sure everyone here is looking at this objectively, it seems like guys are exaggerating a bit.

Do you really think it's slutty to dress like this?



Seriously?

Guess it could be a little bit longer since the girl has long legs, but come on?
I mean, in countries in South America and near the equator where it's really hot, it's very common for women and girls to have a summer dress like that on. I don't see the big deal. I can understand if she rather wear that than the school policy on a hot day.

What is bad though, is how the father seems to make a bigger thing out of it than it really is and is willing to bitch about it. I guess he mostly just tries to win some PC points by appearing on the tv and shit.

[ivansirko]

^Thirteen years old....

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(01-08-2018 05:44 PM)The Alpha Virgin Wrote:  

I'm not sure everyone here is looking at this objectively, it seems like guys are exaggerating a bit.

Do you really think it's slutty to dress like this?



Seriously?

Guess it could be a little bit longer since the girl has long legs, but come on?
I mean, in countries in South America and near the equator where it's really hot, it's very common for women and girls to have a summer dress like that on. I don't see the big deal. I can understand if she rather wear that than the school policy on a hot day.

What is bad though, is how the father seems to make a bigger thing out of it than it really is and is willing to bitch about it. I guess he mostly just tries to win some PC points by appearing on the tv and shit.

Wait a second. The news report said she was cited for wearing a "romper," but in the pic above it looks like she's wearing something known as a "baby doll dress" -- which has a bottom like a short skirt (as opposed to shorts) and is a very sexually-charged adult piece of women's clothing (see example below).



I can't imagine any woman wearing a baby doll dress to work, so wearing it to school seems very risque. This is the kind of thing women in their thirties wear on a "hot date" or to a swanky party. On top of all that, this girl's baby doll dress is super short -- so short that if she leaned over or sat down, her underwear wound be visible.

It also rides above her hands, and the standard length for a short skirt comes just below the fingers...like the one worn by the model in the photo I posted above this.

From what I understand, a romper is a piece of clothing where the legs are like shorts, not like a micro-mini skirt. See the example below. Am I wrong about this? Either way, this girl is not wearing a standard romper. Rompers are popular with college girls these days and I've never seen one like that.

[Leonard D Neubache]

(01-08-2018 05:44 PM)The Alpha Virgin Wrote:  

...
Do you really think it's slutty to dress like this?



Seriously?

Guess it could be a little bit longer since the girl has long legs, but come on?
I mean, in countries in South America and near the equator where it's really hot, it's very common for women and girls to have a summer dress like that on. I don't see the big deal. I can understand if she rather wear that than the school policy on a hot day.
...

Did you see anyone wearing shit like that on Happy Days?

No.

Does the dress leave anything other than potential birth marks and pubic hair dispersal to the imagination?

No.

On what planet could you possibly describe that dress as being innocent?

Acid test. Your girlfriend says "I'm going out with some friends" and she's wearing that dress. I'm sure you'd be thinking "well it is a little hot outside".

[Germanicus]

(09-20-2017 11:16 AM)Aurini Wrote:  

Canada is more abusive to its citizens, doing whatever it wants without redress or apology; breaking into homes and stealing guns during the flood a few years back, for example.

At the same time, the Canadian government trusts its citizens more than the United States. It's less prone to corralling and spying upon them.

Wherever you go, the noose is tightening.

Not quite. Just as the Canadian establishment heavily relies on the American and British militaries to cover some operational and defence responsibilities, it also relies on Five Eyes Deep State organizations to do a lot of the dirty work. Information about Canadians "inadvertently, accidentally" discovered by the NSA or GCHQ gets shared with Ottawa. Thus allowing the Canadian Deep State to focus on its usual tradecraft such as keeping classified documents in unlocked briefcases in the passenger seats of cars in the parking lots of stadiums during hockey games and failing to do anything about moslem terror networks because muh multiculturalism.

(09-20-2017 10:34 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Fair and balanced system. Why are we allies with Canada again?

The Canadian elite gleefully put the boot to anyone who dares question The Narrative. Say what you want about the how cucked Sweden or the UK are, but dissenters in Europe at least have national identities to rally to. Canada is so cucked, and so bereft of a traditional identity, that being a cuck is the official national identity. There are men, white men, in the military, the police, and the government, who truly do believe it's their life's work to engage in ruthless lawfare against "bigotry and ignorance." Guess what they mean by that?

[Sombro]

"Los Gatos Middle School" = Pussy Middle School?

Guess it couldn't be more fitting.

[godfather dust]

(01-08-2018 05:44 PM)The Alpha Virgin Wrote:  

I'm not sure everyone here is looking at this objectively, it seems like guys are exaggerating a bit.

Do you really think it's slutty to dress like this?



Seriously?

Guess it could be a little bit longer since the girl has long legs, but come on?
I mean, in countries in South America and near the equator where it's really hot, it's very common for women and girls to have a summer dress like that on. I don't see the big deal. I can understand if she rather wear that than the school policy on a hot day.

What is bad though, is how the father seems to make a bigger thing out of it than it really is and is willing to bitch about it. I guess he mostly just tries to win some PC points by appearing on the tv and shit.

Unless she stands up in class she's showing the teacher pussy every time she sits down. If she drops a pencil she shows all the horn dogs ass when picking it up because her dad buys his hoe in training thong underwear.

[Paracelsus]

(01-08-2018 07:23 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

From what I understand, a romper is a piece of clothing where the legs are like shorts, not like a micro-mini skirt. See the example below. Am I wrong about this? Either way, this girl is not wearing a standard romper. Rompers are popular with college girls these days and I've never seen one like that.

Even rompers can be sexualised.



My guess is that she's likely doing the "Ariel Winter", or "garotte your rectum" with it:

[The Alpha Virgin]

^^ Alright, I guess we can agree to disagree then. It just seems to me that it's a thing by Anglo-Saxon cultures and standards, and that it's a bit exaggerated.

I mean, in South America you'll see plenty of young teenage girls who dress like that and it's no big deal.
If I was a teacher in a school I think I had more important things to worry about than if there was one tall girl at the school who once wore a short dress on a really hot summer day.

[Leonard D Neubache]

(01-08-2018 09:02 PM)The Alpha Virgin Wrote:  

^^ Alright, I guess we can agree to disagree then. It just seems to me that it's a thing by Anglo-Saxon cultures and standards, and that it's a bit exaggerated.

I mean, in South America you'll see plenty of young teenage girls who dress like that and it's no big deal.
If I was a teacher in a school I think I had more important things to worry about than if there was one tall girl at the school who once wore a short dress on a really hot summer day.

In Africa there are lots of tribes where the women wear nothing up top.

If you apply third world standards then you get third world results. On a sexual basis this is precisely what's happening in the West. This sort of degeneracy has been normalised to the point where guys like you see a picture like this where a 13 year old girl is wearing a dress that wouldn't qualify as nightwear for a 1960's hooker, and "see nothing wrong with it".

You're telling me that if you were a teacher you'd want to be competing for half the class' attention with little miss THOT there? That you'd have "more important things to worry about?"

If you want to enjoy the decline, that's just dandy, but let's not pretend that barely pubescent girls dressing like whores is no cause for societal concern.

[questor70]

Anyone old enough here to remember the JonBenet Ramsey mystery?



The controversy at the time was that it was a crime to overly sexualize young girls, that this just incited pedophilia and may have led to her death (and really, nobody knows what happened to her exactly but based on how she was put on display, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what motivated the killer.)

Now we've entered an Orwellian topsy-turvy world where trying to prevent young girls from dressing like pornstars is what's misogynist.

What's the next movement?

#FreeOurGirlsCamelToes ???

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(01-08-2018 08:51 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(01-08-2018 07:23 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

From what I understand, a romper is a piece of clothing where the legs are like shorts, not like a micro-mini skirt. See the example below. Am I wrong about this? Either way, this girl is not wearing a standard romper. Rompers are popular with college girls these days and I've never seen one like that.

Even rompers can be sexualised.



My guess is that she's likely doing the "Ariel Winter", or "garotte your rectum" with it:

OK, good points. But I found the actual picture featured in that newscast. It's clear and close-up and what she's wearing isn't a romper -- it's a short baby doll dress like I suspected.

The problem is, I don't think I should post that photo here or include a link -- unless the moderator gives me the OK. And that in and of itself shows what a problem that outfit is.

Anyway, as I said, I don't see how she could do anything in that without flashing underwear. After seeing the photo itself (not the blurry reproduction from the newscast), I get why alarm bells went on in the brains of school officials.

[Bacchus]

(01-08-2018 11:00 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

(01-08-2018 09:02 PM)The Alpha Virgin Wrote:  

^^ Alright, I guess we can agree to disagree then. It just seems to me that it's a thing by Anglo-Saxon cultures and standards, and that it's a bit exaggerated.

I mean, in South America you'll see plenty of young teenage girls who dress like that and it's no big deal.
If I was a teacher in a school I think I had more important things to worry about than if there was one tall girl at the school who once wore a short dress on a really hot summer day.

In Africa there are lots of tribes where the women wear nothing up top.

If you apply third world standards then you get third world results. On a sexual basis this is precisely what's happening in the West. This sort of degeneracy has been normalised to the point where guys like you see a picture like this where a 13 year old girl is wearing a dress that wouldn't qualify as nightwear for a 1960's hooker, and "see nothing wrong with it".

You're telling me that if you were a teacher you'd want to be competing for half the class' attention with little miss THOT there? That you'd have "more important things to worry about?"

If you want to enjoy the decline, that's just dandy, but let's not pretend that barely pubescent girls dressing like whores is no cause for societal concern.

There's no #thotpatrol anymore. It used to be that the community would enforce a certain standard of modesty in women's dress. Now, girls wear whatever they want and expect that only the men they want will look. So girls wear booty shorts and act indignant when hobos and other assorted losers stare at their ass. Bitch, your butthole is showing.

Meanwhile in the 19th Century:

[Laner]

Rompers are a popular because they are very unique in the fashion world. At once playful, in that they elicit feelings of childhood (onesies) and yet the materials tell people they are adults and sexual.

I had a girl tell me once that rompers felt very sexy, much of it to do that when she had to pee, she had to get fully naked. From the tits down, she was forced to sit in the plush toilet of a chic lounge, tits protruding and freshly shaved vag in the breeze.

Perhaps her father never knew this, or maybe he did. Her mother certainly does, and so does she. Rompers also require thong underwear, of which I am certain this sloot in training certainly has drawers full of.

And yes, that camera angle made me choke a bit. If I saw a camera man go down for that angle to get my daughters developing mons veneris in the right light, that camera would smashed over his fucken head.

[nomadbrah]

Rompers are sexual, they show a lot of skin and has the ass jiggle on display with every step.

As for the south america comparison, well in some countries there, 13 is the age of consent, so I'm not sure that's a good example. Incidentally, South America also has very high rates of teen pregnancy.