[thingsarenice]

I think he does call the father a "homo", but if you watch the show, House treats everyone like that; he's constantly commenting about his boss's breasts, making racist comments about the black member of his staff and his car-thief past, telling patients that their spouse must be cheating on them/getting ready to leave them/dressing up in their clothing with little to no evidence. He's a dick and if he had treated this patient with any sensitivity whatsoever, it would have been completely out of character.
So, to wrap up: House isn't anti-intersexed people, House is just anti everyone.

[bunnyb]

zora, I don't have much time to respond fully but no, that's not what the way the show is. The articles is OTT and, as far as I remember, not factual (I don't recall him calling the father "homo") but the episode is also very over the top. Gregory House is an offensive character, he's written that way, he is un PC and downright obnoxious but that's why everyone loves him. The episode was not sensitively handled but I think it does raise awareness.

[zora]

My dad is constantly trying to get me to watch "house." Never mind that I work when it airs, but oh well.
I don't think I want to watch it after reading this article: http://www.isna.org/node/1008

Is this the way the show is? If so, I'm never going to watch it and shame on the writers and actors for putting this crap together.

[pepper]

actually, i think this is kind of interesting. don't know if i agree with the tactics but so very interesting none the less...

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=092006C

[prettynpink]

I cant believe what happened to her and the leniency of the sentence. I'm so angry for this woman...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/norther...and/5371760.stm

[maddy29]

yeah, that's what angers me so much. there is this huge fear of child molesters and stuff, and kids being exposed to adult sexuality, yet, we are the ones doing it-exposing them, etc. (i mean, not we as in busties, we as in people).

why don't people make that connection? we truly are encouraging pedophiles, because we're sending the message that it's ok to see little girls as sex objects. and if it's ok to see them as sexy, then it's not that far of a reach to then want to have sex with them...

[thepointybird]

yeah, those are so scary, too. the jon benet look-scary-all that makeup, it just looks so odd on such a tiny little person. it's sad to me to see all the ways we sexualize little ones so early on.

And the really scary thing is that when I linked to it, the ad at the top of the site is all about how to keep your children safe from predatory internet paedophiles. I'd have thought having 5 year olds look like Victoria's Secret models is positively encouraging paedophiles.....

[maddy29]

yeah, those are so scary, too. the jon benet look-scary-all that makeup, it just looks so odd on such a tiny little person. it's sad to me to see all the ways we sexualize little ones so early on.

[xexyz]

I'm pretty much against child modeling/beauty pagentry of all forms, but to be honest the types of pictures where the girls are all dolled up with makeup, earings, and the rest to make them look adult as possible creep me out more than the ones being discussed here.

[ginger_kitty]

Wow, that's really wrong. I didn't mind the first two pics, but the topless one? Who would objectify thier child like that, with so many child predators roaming around.

The string bikini thing was odd, too. They just didn't look like little girl's suits.

[erinjane]

I didn't think it was that bad either until I saw the photos. Both of them are extremely creepy and definatly sexualized. They just make me feel so uncomfortable and wrong.

[katiebelle2882]

yeah i dont like the topless one. if she was just running around topless on the beach thats one thing, but the whole over the shoulder thing is weird. string bikinis for young kids is weird too, but not necessarily wrong. just not for me. she is going to be an gorgeous as her mother though sadly though, she will most likely be curvy like her mom too and considered "fat" or something ridiculous like that.

[pepper]

tramp stamp. gah...

"What mother in her right mind would allow her child to be sexualized in that way?"
one who's mother (or someone else) did it to her when she was young? so very sad either way.

naked is fine, naked is just fine. sexy prepubescent is so not fine i'm gagging over here. so terribly, horribly wrong.

[maddy29]

Exactly-it's not that it's bad or dirty for kids to not wear shirts, or clothes for that matter! lots of kids just like to be naked, and that should be fine. it's when they are SEXUALIZED that it's wrong. it's called child pornography, and it's supposed to be illegal. ha. i wonder if there were little boys in those ads that were posing in their speedos (yeah right-more like trunks) and being "sexy" by pulling down the front of the speedo a bit-how would THAT be seen?

anyone remember those sick ass guess ads in the 80's? it was a topless little girl-maybe 8-10 years old, sitting on sick ass old george's lap. my mom wouldn't buy guess jeans becasue of that (and the price).

so, is that supposed to be a tattoo on her lower back? (known as the "tramp stamp.")

[roseviolet]

When I first heard this, I wasn't terribly disturbed. Afterall, when I was 5 I ran around without a top on when my family went to the lake. But then I looked at those photos. That pose where she is coyly looking over her shoulder with that back-tattoo thing ... Highly inappropriate. What mother in her right mind would allow her child to be sexualized in that way?

[maddy29]

i don't think it's appropriate for 5 year old to do topless modeling shoots, no.

[katiebelle2882]

eh whatever. shes a much smarter model than most of them. not to mention business woman. personally, i wouldnt put my 5 year old in a bikini but i dont really think its THAT big of a deal. i mean is this the first time you have seen a little girls bikini?

[maddy29]

yep, exactly. it's sad. i'd think someone who'd been in the modeling world would want to protect her kids from being seen as only a body,but i guess cindy is really THAT clueless.

[pepper]

well is it really so surprising coming from a woman who's only worth has ever been her physical appearance? really?
still gross but hardly unexpected.
'scuse me while i go throw up.

[maddy29]

this is fucking sick-cindy crawfords FIVE year old daughter is modeling bikinis- cause you know, 5 year olds need bikinis. check out these pictures-ewwwww-nice topless picture....she's fucking 5!!!!

http://www.celebrity-babies.com/2006/09/cindy_crawfords.html