Amanda Rishworth, sexualised content, and yet another politician thinking of the children ...

(Above: the Australian Sex Party site, blacked out in its protest phase, now over. Don't blame them, blame Senator Conroy).

A reader recently provided a link to a Macquarie University page illustrating the Australian English accents, with audio examples, and I have to say I was compelled and captivated. (Australian English accent highlights audio illustrations).

What a clever, simple learning tool, and these days you can number such pages in the thousands upon thousands. Ross Cameron, where are you?

The intertubes have already turned into a vast repository of information, with ingenious mechanisms for perking up the information as it lands on the screen of anyone with a connection.

Sure information needs checking (no one can ever do a workaround to the rule garbage in = garbage out) and cautious handling, but have you ever taken a look at your old textbooks, and the nuggets of misinformation buried within them, to be mined by a generation or two of schoolkids? And sure the intertubes can turn to the dark side, though I must confess even the dark side provides immense educational and entertainment value (want a free, otherwise expensive textbook? Check out the Russians).

And then of course we come to The Punch, Australia's most retrograde contribution to conversation on the intertubes.

Why do they let politicians ramble on at length? Is it because it's free content? Or is it a devious way to prove that the Rudd government is surely as silly or sillier than Tony Abbott when it comes to matters of sex?

The evidence? Amanda Rishworth, and Why should children be exposed to videos like this?

Including a link to a "video like this" on YouTube just so you know what a "video like this" might look like, and can serve as a sterling example to any child who might accidentally drop in to The Punch, perhaps not even in search of a "video like this" but nonetheless handily supplied with one, just in case.

Well it surely ain't a study of the Australian accent, this sexy bitch video, but if it's what Rishworth fears, I fear for her.

Now it turns out that Amanda Rishworth MP is the federal member for Kingston, a seat that embraces some of the nicest turf in South Australia, from the almonds of Willunga to the wineries of McLaren Vale. I used to love taking a day trip, doing a winery tour (hello Coriole), and heading off to a romp at Maslin beach - hey, anything to plug the joys of a nude beach in Rishworth's electorate, where children can roam and play in the nude, away from the hysterical fears of moral panic merchants.

However it seems all is not well at Maslin beach and that the Maslin beach Olympics are doubtful for 2010.

Say it ain't so Joe! Here at loon pond, we never miss an opportunity to plug Maslin beach. Notice the craggy, sandy, weathered rockface in this picture:

And here you can see the geological striations impeccably displayed (both snaps from a drama which might almost be a geological documentary, eponymously titled Maslin Beach).

Oops, sorry kids, as well as the rocks, there's a couple of nude bodies. That's what's under clothes, but never dress like this. Yes, it's perfectly safe to look at, and quite harmless in its own way, it's only flesh and bones, but these days it just gets moral panic merchants terribly alarmed - or is that excited.

Does Rishworth address this crucial Maslin Beach crisis in The Punch? Happening amongst her very own constituents?

No, instead she blathers on in a way that would surely earn her a cabinet post in any Tony Abbott government:

Sexy images of women are used to sell everything, from cars to spring water to internet access. Many such ads are targeted at men, but ads for products aimed at women are often similar.

Not only are sexually provocative images of women used to advertise, but they are routinely featured on television, music video clips, movies and even toys. While adults are better equipped to deal with the bombardment of sexualised content, we need to stop to consider the impact it has on children.

Well I never. Astonishing news. Sex sells and advertisers use sex to sell. You mean all those murals in Pompeii suggested even the Romans were interested in sex? Just as well I suppose that the ancestors were interested in sex, seeing as how it's a prerequisite for carrying on the line.

And yes there she blows, as Rishworth delivers a variant on the now common, timeless, perhaps already immortal line, won't someone think of the children.

Steady on, read that grab again. How do we know we're in the grip of a jargon wielder of the first water? Yep, sexualised content is the giveaway. Well let's not get carried away, and suggest in a Freudian way that everything is sexual. Who can remember the days when boys got excited over bra ads in The Australian Women's Weekly? Or Victorians admired a shapely table leg?

Let's just cluck in a disapproving way at the mother grundy notion of sexualised content.

Because next thing you know we'd be ending up with the notion that children aren't sexualised, despite having been born as sexual beings with sexual organs, but somehow live in a kind of Peter Pan fantasy world until they emerge from the chrysalis at the age of 16 (or whatever the legal age of consent is in your part of the world), and up until that time they spend their time being sexualised by the deviant media (as opposed to their immediate family environment, their peers and friends, and their school).

I’m not talking simply of the obvious objectionable examples like lingerie for pre-teen girls or baby t-shirts with suggestive slogans on them.

Um are we talking about the children now, or derelict adults? I mean, I know babies can be keen shoppers, influenced as they are by the media, but I can't recollect a time when I saw when buying a t-shirt with a suggestive slogan on it. Never mind:

Children are consuming sexualised images of women and girls on a daily basis. Parents are often alarmed when they see the sort of music video clips on TV every Saturday morning, screened in programs clearly aimed at children and teenagers.

Parents are alarmed, but totally impotent and helpless? Except when buying stuff for kids with suggestive slogans?

Helpless even in the face of a music video clip that can be legally carried on The Punch, casually used to illustrate a story by an MP and available to anyone who can access the internet! Why it even might be a handy workaround to Senator Conroy's brave new world filter.

Sob. Is there no end to the festering corruption and sexualisation of minors. No wonder parents are alarmed. But helpless. Letting their two year olds, or was it their thirteen year olds - who knows, when you're in a generally stupid argument generally relevant matters don't count - watch video clips on a Saturday morning when they could be out at Girl Guides or Scouts meet learning how to wank behind the shed.

These clips show scantily clad woman gyrating and being provocative while often the male singer is fully clothed – an example is David Guetta and Akon’s recent hit ‘Sexy Bitch’ which has been a YouTube sensation with its’ poolside bikini antics.

Except when the male singer displays his pecs, or in the case of boy bands sickeningly white flesh. But hey let's not let a generalisation stand in the way of an exaggeration.

The popularity of web sites and the growth of mobiles and ipods for teenagers has markedly increased easy access to concerning content.

Oh yes, we're back on the old 'the intertubes is markedly concerning' routine, as it replaces comics, television, feature films, and even it would seem, the prospect of 3D porn as the newest threat to the world of moral equilibrium.

Shocked and disturbed at this "concerning content", I immediately rushed to watch the video. What else could I do? And you know what? Rishworth is trading off, taking a current hit to make a point totally irrelevant to the intent of the video or its audience.

Sure, there were scantily clad young women in all kinds of dress - bikinis even - and the singer was trying to find the words to describe this girl without being disrespectful, ending up with talk of sexy bitches, but most shocking of all were the images of black and white folk getting along and having a good time together. You know, diving into a pool with their clothes on, and dancing on and having a little rave. And not even taking drugs, but relying on lasers and lighting and music for fun. I mean, there's raw flesh, and then there's the shock of miscegenation ...

Well I realised immediately that anyone exposed to this kind of material would likely as not immediately turn into a full blown depravity monster of the worst kind. They might even find black people attractive, and able to cobble together a nice hook in an old fashioned pop song.

So why isn't anyone thinking about the children?

Phew, thank the lord, Rishworth keeps on about it:

It is common sense that the age and developmental stage of a child will determine how they react to the stream of sexualised material they are exposed to. This has an effect on how both girls and boys develop their identity and view gender roles.

Studies suggest that girls and teenagers who have more exposure to mass media that sexually objectify girls and women are more likely to view themselves as sexual objects.

Studies suggest! No names, no pack drill. We wouldn't want to get too deep - strangle me in the shallow water before I get too deep.

I'm not aware of too many things
I know what I know if you know what I mean

Philosophy, is the talk on a cereal box
Religion, is a smile on a dog
I'm not aware of too many things
I know what I know if you know what I mean

Chuck me in the shallow water
Before I get too deep

Oops Edie Brickell, I don't think you're taking this seriously enough. What we need here is deep anxiety, massive concern, perhaps even a moral panic. Because it's not just young girls who are affected, it's young men:

It is also not surprising those boys’ attitudes to how they see girls and women are effected by this content.

The report by the American Psychological Association suggested that exposure to this material affect girls’ physical and mental health, including an increase in low self esteem, body dissatisfaction, anxiety about their appearance and depression.

Well why not give them some pills? That's the sound American reaction to this kind of problem, isn't it? Dose them up on some ritalin, methylphenidate if you will, or other handy substances designed to put a glow in your day, and take away all those terrible issues of self esteem, body dissatisfaction, and anxiety about their appearance and the consequent depression. Got nothing to do with the way a large percentage of Americans are morbidly obese, or just plain downright fat freaks.

But do go on, let's keep pumping up the moral panic:

Research conduced by two Adelaide based researchers showed that it only takes 15 minutes of watching music video clips that objectify women for the participants to start feeling more conscious about their body and more depressed.

Only 15 minutes!? Wow I'd like to see the parameters for that research. There's nothing like value laden terms to arrive at a sublimely value free objective conclusion, is there.

And there I was thinking it was only ten seconds for me to get depressed, when I saw a sweet young thing aged about twenty walking along the street, her hips swinging, her face a moonbeam smile, so young alive, and me, so old and decrepit, plodding along behind, thinking there were plenty of good reasons to turn, seeing as how men are such sex objectifying bastards, always conspiring to depress me.

Until I began to think, hang on, I might be objectifying this sweet young thing myself, never mind the age gap. Oh the dangers of a walk in Newtown where the tatts run wild, and the clothes are just like a hippie sexy bitch film clip ...

Could it mean reality occasionally acts in a way that leads to sexual objectification and sexually arousing content?

Oh throw me out of a plane without a parachute. It's just occurred to me. Men and women get sexually aroused by each other and view and treat people as sexual objects, with and without the help of the media.Who can we blame? God? Eve? Well I always think it's Adam and the snake, but let's not get too excited about snakes. (Freud, back in your box).

Sssh, back to the moral panic:

Of tremendous concern is the disturbing trend that younger and younger children are being targeted by advertisers who are convincing them they need to be sexy. Take the magazines that target pre-teens, which instruct girls on how to wear make-up or the Bratz dolls wearing fish nets and bras – marketed to four to eight year olds.

Yep, tremendously disturbing concern ... which is why the four to eight year olds rush into the store, fully cashed up, and lash out on the goods, irrespective of what their parents might think or say, thankfully having earned their loot independent of their parents. You just can't control these sexualised kids these days. Not with parents who think sexy video clips are somehow normal, as opposed to deeply fully sick.

Only last week I was stunned to see in a celebrity magazine, the section “Who Wore It Better” compared photos of Suri Cruise (aged three) with Apple Martin (aged five). The public could vote on which of these two children wore their outfit better.

Stunned, I tells ya. There was the writer of Alice in Wonderland taking nude photographs of young girls in the nineteenth century, possibly for later publication in a celebrity magazine or on the intertubes.

What's that? The problem's actually Tom Cruise? Oh no, not Tom Cruise. It's all his fault! Well surely this is an international disaster! From henceforth let all children only dress in potato sacks. Never shall they be allowed to play dress ups thanks to rich parents who've made a fucking fortune playing silly dress ups. Now if Rishworth had been moaning about how the kids were being exposed to scientology ...

Of course not. What's the problem with a thetan or a volcano or two, compared to sex rearing its ugly head.

Surely this is an example of how we have gone too far where we now objectify even children.

How to tackle the sexualisation of women and girls, and associated negative effects, is complex and difficult but must be addressed.

Yes, indeed, it is of course complex and difficult. But it must be addressed. Would addressing an envelope do?

Forget the potato sack! That's why loon pond, now anxious, concerned, and tremendously alarmed, is today calling for every female child below the age of fifteen to be put into a burqa when outside the home - and inside the home if there are any other children present, outside genuine siblings, and even then, is that a good idea? All television is to be banned, except for one hour of Chairman Rudd each night starting sharp at seven, everybody in bed by eight, and there shall be no dancing, no music - not even that wretchedly erotic classical stuff, yes you Richard Strauss, we're talking about you and Salome - and above all no more fornication! Nada. Zip.

Because naturally anyone over 15 will also be in a burqa, and instead of being sexually objectified, women can once again turn into domestic servants for men, as it was in the good old days.

Soon enough we will have a state into which we can happily invite the Taliban for sundry joint ventures, working hard to eradicate the last vestiges of western decadence, to be replaced by a joyous dedication to the state run by Chairman Rudd, who was voted eternal leader by popular acclaim at the end of 2010.

Never mind, that's hardly a serious response, what's to be done?

Some advocates in this area have called on industry to become more responsible in where and when they show this content, while others have called for government regulation.

Oh yes, let's censor the intertubes, let's ban sexy bikinis, let's ban sexy bodies, let's ban the words sexy bitch, and let's regulate music clips. And let's regulate television.

But, but, but they already are ... they're classified, and you can tell from their classification what the censors deem appropriate to certain ages. And if you think David Guetta is a problem, then you're either a wowser or a prude.

Damn you fool, we don't want rational discussion here, we want moral panic and government regulation, and a determination that this content can only be shown after midnight along with the ads for sexy companions and sexy goods. So that a kid with a video recorder can watch them in the morning.

Sssh, no one mention the nanny state. Conservatives only write about the nanny state when it applies to tobacco and fast foods. They love to regulate sex, bind it in briars and constrict our desires.

We also need to educate and help parents to counter the messages so persuasive throughout our mass media.

One thing we can’t do is push this issue under the carpet. We need to do our best to ensure that the next generation of women grow up confident, self assured, and not determine success or fulfilment by whether they qualify as a ‘sexy bitch’.

Oh dear, and there I was thinking that as a sexy bitch, I might be confident and self assured and by actually enjoying sex, actually achieve some measure of fulfilment. With or without men.

Clearly I'm on the wrong planet. Or Amanda Rishworth is.

Roll on election day. I'm so over Chairman Rudd, Senator Conroy and the likes of Amanda Rishworth.

If they don't have a Bah humbug party on the ballot, then I'm thinking of organising a sexy bitch party. Oh wait, we already have the Australian Sex Party, and when last I checked they were part of the Great Australian Internet Blackout ... well they'll have to do.

Hell will freeze over before I vote for Conroy or Rudd or their moral panic merchandising, and I thank Rishworth for reminding me of that.

Now before we go, time for a little squeezing of your lemon. Though perhaps you might prefer "Ride Daddy Ride" or "I Want a Bowlegged Woman", or perhaps "It Ain't The Meat, It's the Motion", or how about "You Put It In, I'll Take It Out", or perhaps "Doodle Hole" Or "Poon Tang", or how about "It Must Be Jelly 'Cos You Know) Jam Don't Shake, or perhaps "Mule Get Up in the Alley" or even "Let Me Ride in Your Little Automobile", not to mention "Move Your Hand Baby", "Sit Right on It" and "She Kept Sittin' on It All the Time". (Ride Daddy Ride).

Golly, they were a filthy lot in the old days. These days we only jiggle and shake our booty in bikinis.

Oh okay while we're at it, here's a video clip that's truly disturbing and not to be watched by anyone under 18. It is definitively Not Safe For Work. It just so happens to be a great clip by Chris Cunningham, featuring Aphex Twin's Windowlicker. Click on this, it's your responsibility.

But if you have an aesthetic bone in your body, you'll find the upending of conventional sexual imagery interesting, and disturbing, not to mention the gutter language, which starts to flow like a ream of James Joyce. Naturally, back in the day, conservatives had their standard set of kittens while watching it. I went out and bought the Cunningham DVD. So it goes.

How long, before - in the name of the children - Conroy, Rudd and the likes of Rishworth strip this sort of content from the intertubes? Yep, in the eternal struggle between the wowsers and the sensualists, as usual the wowsers are winning ... and it's going to get worse ...