PDA

View Full Version : Animated Frog's Genitals Okay For TV?


kilikili
02-03-2005, 06:21 PM
What they said (whole article):

"Despite complaints from 60 people, Britain's advertising regulators said Wednesday there is nothing inappropriate about the genitals of an animated frog whose high-pitched squeals are sold as a mobile phone ringtone. Television adverts of the motorcycle-riding Crazy Frog, who is drawn with a broad smile and a tiny penis, run frequently on British television, amusing, baffling and annoying viewers.

"While unusual for an animated model of this type to be shown with genitalia, no sexual or inappropriate references were made about its anatomy," the UK's Advertising Standards Authority said.

Twenty-two people complained they were worried children might see the advertising, which also promotes screen savers and mobile videos. Five parents said they were embarrassed by questions their children had asked.

Other viewers simply found the commercial annoying and thought it was shown too often.

"We appreciate that the frequent broadcast of the same, or similar commercials can be annoying to some viewers," the ASA said. "However, it is for the advertiser and broadcaster to decide how often a particular advertisement is shown."

Because the ads contain a text number to place an order, they are barred from being shown during children's programs, and the ASA said there were no reports of children being concerned by the advert."


Source (http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=7513901)


Whoa, they got balls to do this.


-Kilikili

BillB
02-03-2005, 07:01 PM
And the award for Thread Title of the Week goes to...

Stychentyme
02-03-2005, 07:06 PM
I think we have a winner. :D

heavyness
02-03-2005, 07:21 PM
and now for something completely different...

Beamtracer
02-03-2005, 07:30 PM
http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~bcondon/a4/frog.jpg

Frogs don't have genitals!

Well, a real frog (male or female) has a single opening called a cloaca. So if this 3D animated frog has something else, then it's not anatomically correct.

Those who make animations for US television are usually painfully aware about these kind of sensitivities. It borders on the bizarre, sometimes.

Scientific TV programs or medical TV programs often have models that are not anatomically correct, as the viewers may be shocked if they knew what correct anatomy looks like.

These things seem to be more of an issue in English speaking countries. In "continental" Europe they are more relaxed about it.

Anyone who wants to know what this silly animated frog looks like can click on the link below.
WARNING: The following link contains a nude frog! If you click on it, please don't complain that you didn't know what it is.
http://www.turboforce3d.com/annoying/index.htm

Stychentyme
02-03-2005, 07:35 PM
I think this is what they're talking about??

http://www.turboforce3d.com/annoying/

Ran13
02-03-2005, 07:35 PM
I live in the Cincinnati, OH area and they've been running that ad here fairly often. And with very little uproar...amazing considering this is the land of Larry Flynt's arch nemesis: uber-crook Charles Keating's "Citizens for Community Values". ;)

Most people I've talked to thought the frog simply had an overly large "outtie" belly-button! ;) It seems to have never occured to them that someone would have the audacity to put a penis on television.:rolleyes:

Dennik
02-03-2005, 07:39 PM
Geez, horses, cows, and dogs have genitals. Better never leave the house.

Beamtracer
02-03-2005, 07:45 PM
Geez, horses, cows, and dogs have genitals. Better never leave the house. In England during Queen Victoria's time, they used cloth to cover the legs of dining tables, as all legs were considered indecent.

They also used to sprinkle talcum powder into the bath water so they wouldn't see themselves!

marc001
02-03-2005, 08:00 PM
I was surprised when I saw this on television. I saw postings of this animation a while back. Is the origional artist getting paid for these cell phone screens?

js33
02-03-2005, 08:32 PM
Hehehehe. Yeah I wondered the same thing myself.
See his website. On the front page there is a notice saying he has an agreement with the company. Also that company has allegedly made over 10 million pounds on this animation ringtone so far.

Cheers,
JS

agreenster
02-03-2005, 08:43 PM
The same company contacted me about using Dumpy in their commercials.

Icarus
02-03-2005, 09:19 PM
heres the fun part,

here in australia, on regular TV, the lower part of the grog has a nice big "CENSORED" over its parts...

but..

being on subscription/digital tv its not there, and you can just see the little thing, its not even really in view much, it just looks like a little tab or something.. lol

interesting how people can be put off by something so little like that :P

TyR

Beamtracer
02-03-2005, 09:20 PM
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39818000/jpg/_39818991_janetap_203.jpg
After the Janet Jackson "wardrobe malfunction", the President was swift to voice his concern. Maybe someone should telephone the White House to let them know that this 3D animated frog is wearing no pants.

Dennik
02-03-2005, 09:28 PM
Have they also removed the fart because its innapropriate?

Fasty
02-03-2005, 09:52 PM
The same company contacted me about using Dumpy in their commercials.

What did you say? Did you sell your soul? :twisted:

KolbyJukes
02-03-2005, 09:57 PM
Five parents said they were embarrassed by questions their children had asked.


they were embaressed about that?

honestly...

it's not even like it sexual. He has a penis...all males have penises...

-K.

FiveMan
02-03-2005, 10:11 PM
He has a penis...all males have penises...

as do hermaphrodites...

Beamtracer
02-03-2005, 10:22 PM
He has a penis...all males have penises...Male frogs don't.

Flog
02-03-2005, 10:44 PM
did you notice only 60 people complained.

So I hope those 60 people don't make a differance. It is becoming all to common for the minority to effect the majority.

agreenster
02-03-2005, 10:47 PM
What did you say? Did you sell your soul? :twisted:

I said it sounded cool and that I was interested, and we exchanged several emails. I havent heard back from them though. Oh well!

Besides, I dont think they could use the music I used in the tightrope short because it is copyrighted. They could use the animation though

DigiLusionist
02-03-2005, 10:54 PM
My great-uncle has testicles, too. But would it be acceptable to show children an animation of him dancing naked as his testicles bounced around? I guess in Europe that would be just fine, but I'm glad we're a bit more discerning about that sort of thing. I mean, jeez, don't you guys find ANYTHING inappropriate?

bluemagicuk
02-03-2005, 11:00 PM
That ad is the most annoying thing i have seen all year .. granted that is like only 2 months but still.

Your watching the box or any music channell for that matter and that thing keeps poping up like twice in 60 seconds .... must get death ray finished to blow up music channell executives.

Beamtracer
02-03-2005, 11:27 PM
My great-uncle has testicles, too. But would it be acceptable to show children an animation of him dancing naked as his testicles bounced around? I guess in Europe that would be just fine, but I'm glad we're a bit more discerning about that sort of thing. I mean, jeez, don't you guys find ANYTHING inappropriate?

I think it's always better that children can discuss what a naked human (or frog for that matter) looks like. It's much better to talk about it with them, rather than hide things away. They must even be encouraged to talk about these things.

What the danger is, and what happens is when someone's great uncle does something nasty and inappropriate to the kids and the kids can't tell anyone because they were always told not to talk about these things. It happens millions of times around the world where kids don't tell anyone because such talk is indecent.

A naked 3D animated frog is a good opportunity for parents to answer childrens' questions and to let it be known that it's OK to talk about such issues.

DigiLusionist
02-04-2005, 01:32 AM
Beam, have you got children? Yes, we all have either a penis or a vagina. But, showing genitalia to children through a mass medium like TV is not an appropiate way to introduce the splendor that is the human body. It's not a matter of Puritanism, just a matter of common sense.

Regardless of whether it's a cartoon character, or not, a penis is a penis. If some parents don't want their children exposed to a visual like that, or to have a pre-mature discussion about sex before they feel the time is right, that is their right and responsibility.

As your pithy signature claims, one should not impose their moral (or immoral) values on someone else.

Beamtracer
02-04-2005, 02:21 AM
one should not impose their moral (or immoral) values on someone else. Hi DigiLusionist. You probably wouldn't like to go for a vacation to Sweden, Norway or Finland, as you might be shocked by the nudity on their television programs and advertisements.

As for this little frog... well I think they got a lot more publicity because it had a little dingle. I probably wouldn't have heard of it otherwise.

Your children are going to see much more than this, whether you like it or not. In fact, you might have to cover their eyes when they walk onto the street in case a naked dog runs by (you know what those naked dogs look like!)

I notice some pet supply stores are stocking quite a big range of dog clothes these days. Maybe there should be a law that all dogs must wear clothes. This would protect the children, and discourage them from asking embarrassing questions of their parents.

JDex
02-04-2005, 02:38 AM
Meh!

The "dingle" is silly, the debate is silly... while I believe that parents should have the right to control what their children see, there are things like the v-chip (at least in the states) that offer adequate protection. I watch a few kids from time to time and their parent have the v-chip enabled and it stops many commercials and shows from being played... It must be tough to be a parent today... but it must be even tougher to be a sheltered child...

feefunk
02-04-2005, 03:22 AM
Regardless of whether it's a cartoon character, or not, a penis is a penis. If some parents don't want their children exposed to a visual like that, or to have a pre-mature discussion about sex before they feel the time is right, that is their right and responsibility.

As your pithy signature claims, one should not impose their moral (or immoral) values on someone else.

DigiLusionist... you are contradicting yourself with that last phrase you wrote... :shrug:

And besides... it's a freaking cartoon, not a human! Did you also find it inappropriate when that banner for that 3D training DVD with a monster with genitals was on the page of CGTalk?

Anyways, it is better to have a "pre-mature discussion" about sex than to pretend your kids will be sheltered from seeing a naked body until they are ready. And then oopsies... poor kid is stuck with a baby because no one was mature and educated enough to explain to him/her what genitals are for. :eek:
No reason to be ashamed of what you call "the splendor of the human body".


Anyways, no hard feelings DigiLusionist, I just don't agree with your arguments.

alexyork
02-04-2005, 07:54 AM
Anyways, it is better to have a "pre-mature discussion" about sex than to pretend your kids will be sheltered from seeing a naked body until they are ready. And then oopsies... poor kid is stuck with a baby because no one was mature and educated enough to explain to him/her what genitals are for. :eek:

i don't think most people watching the short even noticed "it" the 1st time round. My family didn't. Plus I don't think anyone's gonna be learning anything from it :)

ehem.

brrrrum brrrsaaazaaaa brrrurm rbrruaamam bdalalaldam WHEE!

make it stop! :scream:

WesComan
02-04-2005, 10:52 AM
I notice some pet supply stores are stocking quite a big range of dog clothes these days. Maybe there should be a law that all dogs must wear clothes. This would protect the children, and discourage them from asking embarrassing questions of their parents.

Hurray for dogs in clothes! I like these ones best...
http://www.rebelscum.com/photo.asp?image=http://www.rebelscum.com/toys2005/SWcostumespets.jpg (http://www.rebelscum.com/photo.asp?image=http://www.rebelscum.com/toys2005/SWcostumespets.jpg)

:scream:

flipnap
02-04-2005, 12:55 PM
hmm, you guys have a point here.. in fact i wonder why pooh bear didnt have a penis.. i mean bears do have a penis.. and what about shrek.. i mean do ogres really wear clothes? and bugs bunny? whats up with that.. chuck jones and Disney, etc must have been real prudes!!! why were they trying to "protect" children and hide the fact that genitals exist!

Seriously, think about it.. Some of all your comments are pretty weak.. if theres nothing wrong with genitals or sex, because its "natural" than why not let your kids watch porn, i mean sex is natural after all.. why hide it from them..

WEAK!

Madhat
02-04-2005, 01:24 PM
I have to admit, I am caught in the middle for this one.

On the one hand, parents being embarassed by having to talk to their kids about genitals is no grounds for censuring the commercial. If the genitals in question are not referred to, or made part of the pitch to sell the product, and are not made into a sexual referrence, then it's all good.

But on the other hand, why did they need to design the frog that way in the first place? The Gecko from Geiko dosn't have a schlong dragging on the ground. I personally think it's poor design on the studio's part.

On a side note: I don't know if any of you have seen it, but more than once I have seen 2D cartoon cats and dogs, when viewed from behind, with an X where their anus would be. That, I have found surprising. I personally worked on a show called Twins (I think it is aired in the UK and in French for Quebec.) There was a cat with a big ol' X under the tail.

Recursive
02-04-2005, 01:38 PM
hmm, you guys have a point here.. in fact i wonder why pooh bear didnt have a penis.. i mean bears do have a penis.. and what about shrek.. i mean do ogres really wear clothes? and bugs bunny? whats up with that.. chuck jones and Disney, etc must have been real prudes!!! why were they trying to "protect" children and hide the fact that genitals exist!

Seriously, think about it.. Some of all your comments are pretty weak.. if theres nothing wrong with genitals or sex, because its "natural" than why not let your kids watch porn, i mean sex is natural after all.. why hide it from them..

WEAK!

Like kids these days havent seen it already. When I was a kid(in Sweden) you couldnt hide from porn even if you tried. Infact, you still cannot hide from it.

slaughters
02-04-2005, 03:24 PM
...being on subscription/digital tv its not there, and you can just see the little thing, its not even really in view much, it just looks like a little tab or something...

Young Frog with "little tab" => tab(d) pole?

halo
02-04-2005, 03:26 PM
if theres nothing wrong with genitals or sex, because its "natural" than why not let your kids watch porn

there isn't anything wrong with genitalia or sex, because they are natural...porn isn't reflection of natural sex, however I would have a problem with my children watching a sex education program before they were sexually active...for warned is for armed, theres no point about them finding out how they got pregnant after they have is there?

I think its parents making more of a fuss than the kids...

Q_B
02-04-2005, 04:22 PM
Ok lets go cover all the ancient Greek statues ... there's penises there... I bet they got disclaimers on the museum entrances... "DON'T TAKE YOUR CHILDREN TO SEE THE ANCIENT HELENIC ART, IT HAS PENISES."

The world is really getting dumber and dumber ... the "have to explain to children" is a kind of a false argument ... every little boy IS born with a lill weenie too, so they won't be surprised at all to see that. Why just not answer honestly? I mean, penises are really not JUST for sex, ya know? Other natural functions, too, humm? What the hell is so dificult in explaining to a children that asks "Daddy, what's that in the frog?" "Well, it's his lill weenie (or whatever word in english you wanna call it)" You don't really have to explain the mechanisms of sex behaviour...

Once and for all ... THERE IS NO SEX TO BE FOUND in that particular character/animation!

If you people find any explicit/implicit sexual reference there, i advise you to take counselling.

The big problem here is parents tend to so hard super-protect their young ones that sometimes just seem to stop thinking clearly...

Again: It's only monkeys in your head that make you shiver and think of sexual references/behaviour when your son/daughter ask you an explanation about that particular animation. Just give a straight answer: "it's his penis".

Stahlberg
02-04-2005, 04:35 PM
This is stupid. Imagine being a kid and asking a parent a question. He/she turns red in the face and mumbles something like "You're too young, I'll tell you later". Argg!!
Denying a child knowledge is tantamount to lying, and should be a crime. If you're too embarrassed to field the questions then you're putting your own needs before theirs. Don't treat them like mental patients, treat them like human beings.

slaughters
02-04-2005, 05:56 PM
...Denying a child knowledge is tantamount to lying....Nice as general theory Steven. But the reality is much different when you get to specifics. :)

Again: It's only monkeys in your head that make you shiver and think of sexual references/behaviour when your son/daughter ask you an explanation about that particular animation. Just give a straight answer: "it's his penis".Q_B, the correct answere is "It's his wee-wee" :)

plastic
02-04-2005, 06:05 PM
My great-uncle has testicles, too. But would it be acceptable to show children an animation of him dancing naked as his testicles bounced around? I guess in Europe that would be just fine, but I'm glad we're a bit more discerning about that sort of thing. I mean, jeez, don't you guys find ANYTHING inappropriate?


do you have dogs in america? in europe there are dogs everywhere, and some have massive testicles. i guess we learned to live with bouncing testicles.
a frog with testicles is stupid, but this discussion is even more stupid.

DigiLusionist
02-04-2005, 06:06 PM
As I said, I don't care what they do in Europe. Apparently, there's no such thing as decorum or child appropriate thought. And, I'm not a red in the face parent who wants to hide my kids from a discussion about sex. But there is a time and place for that. Sexual images permeate our society and that doesn't make it alright and acceptable.

I just watched a television special about interviews with six through eighth graders who think there's nothing wrong with giving or getting a blow job. They said they see sexuality in everything in TV, so what's wrong with being sexually active as a child?

Back to the topic: I just don't think cartoon characters need to have genitalia. By your reasoning, it would be okay to have a female character with big tits and swollen labia. Is that alright? Does that promote healthy discussions about sex? And why the hell does a five year old really need to learn about sex? Do they need to view such things in order to become a well adjusted human being?

Are ANY of you who are taking the opposing position parents? If so, I just don't know what to say.

feefunk> No, I am not contradicting myself when I say that while a person like Beamtracer claims it is not acceptable for one person to foist their morality on another, it works both ways. Nothing contradictory about that view. I don't want immorality foisted on me or my children. If that view cannot be accepted, then anyone who embraces the initial stance posited by Beam are themselves being hypocritial.

EDIT: Oh, and using the rationale that because dogs run around with their penises showing it should be okay for cartoon dogs to do the same is using fallacious reasoning.

charleyc
02-04-2005, 06:17 PM
This argument comes up very often in these CG (art) online forums. There are two basic sides of the fence and each persons sits on their side, right in their own eyes. I seriously doubt these discussions change anyones minds and simply fuel worthless opinion wars, and by this point is hardly news worthy imo.

halo
02-04-2005, 06:50 PM
Sexual images permeate our society and that doesn't make it alright and acceptable.


Just how is a the CG frog sexual at all? Whats the distinction between the low key existance of genitalia (in fact I had to have it pointed out) and say the same prevailance of it in a wildlife program (even if you exclude a mating scene)? Animals dont tend to wander around camera shy, and i dont know of anyone who thinks its sexual.

I think the only one thats seeing this as seriously sexual is you! Got something going on there with the frog thing? ;)

sebek27
02-04-2005, 06:50 PM
As I said, I don't care what they do in Europe. Apparently, there's no such thing as decorum or child appropriate thought.

huh ? if you look at how most kids from europe act compared to american kids you would notice they are much more educated, behave more appropriate in front of elders, and know a lot more about the world around them. Most kids here are stuck to this notion that America is it. Ask an average american kid if he can show you,for example, where austria is located on a map, see how many you get to say: who cares, or what for... children in europe are much more educated and have better decorum than you think. They are open to the whole world and what is out there than american kids. At least there is no violence on tv in europe; i'd rather my kids see naked people on tv than someone getting their head blown off.

Beamtracer
02-04-2005, 10:45 PM
•Sex is not nudity

•Nudity is not sex

DigiLusionist
02-04-2005, 11:33 PM
???

And a Ford is not a Chevy.

I guess our unsophisticated American children are not worthy of proper parental guidance in regards to sex, then? Why? Because they don't drink wine at dinner and are not discouraged from smoking or engaging in sex at a young age?

It blows me away how Americans are supposedly arrogant, yet there is nothing arrogant about deriding Americans for thinking rampant nudity on mass media is inappropriate? Again, hypocracy.

Halo> Nope. I'm not into CG frog penises. If you are, cool. I just don't think they belong on TV, as the original poster of this thread asked.

Beamtracer
02-05-2005, 01:10 AM
DigiLusionist, I think we agree that children should be protected against sexual predators. We just have different opinions about how this should be done.

As I said before, if nobody ever talks about such matters then that is a pedophile's haven. Kids are better off if they are able to talk about these things openly.

Some religions believe that sex should not be talked about, but these organizations are often the ones with the most perpetrators. Suppressing things is not psychologically healthy.

I really don't think that the animated frog is going to harm any children. Censorship of anatomy sometimes goes to bizarre lengths.

Human anatomy 3D animations seen on The Discovery Channel that depict medical conditions are modified so that certain body parts and sexual organs don't exist. I think this is kinky and perverted. To think that some people see medical animations as sexual is bizarre.

Stahlberg
02-05-2005, 01:34 AM
Are ANY of you who are taking the opposing position parents? If so, I just don't know what to say.


I have 2 boys, 12 and 10. You 'just don't know what to say'? What does that mean? You think I'm a bad parent?

And Slaughter, what does that mean, "nice in theory but not practical"? Give me a situation where it's okay to lie or dissemble to your child.

jcorkery
02-05-2005, 02:08 AM
Are ANY of you who are taking the opposing position parents? If so, I just don't know what to say.

I found this thread to be mildly amusing and I was going to stay out of it until I read this comment. What you seem to be implying here is that any parent who disagrees with your views on this matter is simply not a good parent.

Personally, I think genitals are just another part of the human body. Nothing more, nothing less. Certainly they're an integral part of the human reproductive process, but they're also an integral part of the excretory system. Genitals are only sexual if they're presented that way, the same as breasts, buttocks--even mouths or legs. A person or character doesn't need to be exposing genitalia to be sexual. Not that there's anything wrong with sexuality, in and of itself, either. I think it's sad that our society broadly depicts both nudity and sexuality as almost always vulgar or offensive (a depiction that, in my opinion, creates many more problems than it solves) when they really should only be considered vulgar or offensive in certain contexts, just like plenty of other things in this world.

What I find particularly baffling is that parents seem to be exponentially less bothered by the violent imagery/messages that have permeated our society than a brief flash of nudity here and there. As far as my own son is concerned, I believe that knowledge is power. I believe that children who are more educated about the real world, how it works, and the problems/dangers associated with particular aspects of it are obviously going to be better prepared for it and are much less likely to become victims of peer pressure. It's my responsibility to provide my son with that knowledge rather than trying in vain to shelter him from these things only to have them eventually exposed to him through dubious sources. I guess many parents don't seem to realize that they themselves have much greater access to their children's psyche than anyone or anything else in this world.

MasterZap
02-05-2005, 04:15 AM
Beam, have you got children? Yes, we all have either a penis or a vagina. But, showing genitalia to children through a mass medium like TV is not an appropiate way to introduce the splendor that is the human body. It's not a matter of Puritanism, just a matter of common sense.

"Introduce"? If your children hasn't seen mom and dad naked, well, then... uh... you need to turn the radiators up in the house :)

As a swede, considering the human body a very natural thing, us running around naked to/from the shower or whatnot is completely standard, and naturally our kids are present - so? It's a human body, we all have one.

/Z

MasterZap
02-05-2005, 04:26 AM
As I said, I don't care what they do in Europe. Well, nobody cares what you do in the US, so it's mutual. We just giggle at it :)

Sexual images permeate our society and that doesn't make it alright and acceptable. (Beavis voice: Did he say 'penetrate') Neither does it make it wrong nor unnacceptable.

Back to the topic: I just don't think cartoon characters need to have genitalia. By your reasoning, it would be okay to have a female character with big tits and swollen labia. You need to watch more anime, the big tits are quite a staple there.

Is that alright? Does that promote healthy discussions about sex? And why the hell does a five year old really need to learn about sex? The problem here is that you are making it about sex, while its about a wee-wee (or some boobies). These are not sexual organs to a child, they are wee-wee and boobies.

Do they need to view such things in order to become a well adjusted human being? As a matter of fact - yes. Overt prudeness is very damaging, moreso than any exposer to normal healthy sex.

Are ANY of you who are taking the opposing position parents? If so, I just don't know what to say. 3 boys, 10, 8 and 6.

EDIT: Oh, and using the rationale that because dogs run around with their penises showing it should be okay for cartoon dogs to do the same is using fallacious reasoning. (Beavis voice: 'Did he say fallos reasoning')

:D

/Z

KolbyJukes
02-05-2005, 04:28 AM
honestly...it's not like it's a big floppy man penis and pair of testicles...it's just this tiny little thing, and it's not even remotely sexual.

kids see penises all the time, when a brother or sister is getting their diaper changed, when they play with the dog, this is no different, there's nothing remotely sexual about it -

personally I think some people just need to calm down and relax, if the frog was thrusting his hips sexually I could see getting upset, but this is honestly no big deal.

-K.

XanderFX
02-05-2005, 04:36 AM
I thought it was funny that I was reading this thread this morning and then I watched the Motionbuilder 6 demos tonight on the alias site and they're using the same frog for the demos.

I'm an american parent of 1 boy and 2 girls and I have no issue with this frog. If he was having graphic frog on frog sex then I might think it was inappropriate but come on, IT'S AN ANNOYING CARTOON FROG! It's like all of these nuts in the current administration and the FCC fining everyone left and right because of Janet Jackson's boob last year, they're the ones with the problem.

jcorkery
02-05-2005, 04:59 AM
It's like all of these nuts in the current administration and the FCC fining everyone left and right because of Janet Jackson's boob last year, they're the ones with the problem.

I thought the performers' fully-clothed grinding on each other was much more complaint-worthy than the instantaneous breast flash, but I don't recall hearing many complaints about that...

P.S. One thing I've always wondered... Why is it that men's nipples are fine and dandy for all the world to view, but women's nipples should never see the light of day??

jcorkery
02-05-2005, 05:17 AM
You need to watch more anime, the big tits are quite a staple there.

And, actually, in Japan quite often you'll see child-like cartoon characters with a bare butt or a little penis sticking out. They consider it to be cute, not sexual.

MasterZap
02-05-2005, 05:55 AM
One thing I've always wondered... Why is it that men's nipples are fine and dandy for all the world to view, but women's nipples should never see the light of day?? Indeed - especially since it's apparently okay to show ever square inch of skin surrounding the nipple. A postage-stamp sized piece of cloth is okay. But as soon as the nipple is visible, huge alarms go off...? Wierd.

And, actually, in Japan quite often you'll see child-like cartoon characters with a bare butt or a little penis sticking out. They consider it to be cute, not sexual. Yeah I have a bunch of dragonball comics w. a lot of that in it. :)

/Z

JeroenDStout
02-05-2005, 02:50 PM
So to get in the big guns with this discussion:

What's wrong with nudity anyway?

So what if you see his little chum-chum, it's not like he's doing anything sexual with it. I can understand it if people don't want to have kids watching porn on tv -makes you wonder why they let children watch music tv, then, what the difference between MTV and softporn?-, but nudity.. 'come on. It's natural. The less we are ashamed of it, the more we will talk about it, the less will go wrong because nobody ever dared talking about it.
Honestly, isn't the fact that it embaresses people only a sign that we're on the wrong track here? We should learn to accept we're human. Heck, you don't have to walk around naked, but please accept to see a little frog's chumchum every now and then.

flipnap
02-05-2005, 03:31 PM
wow, i just came back to check the thread and im blown away.This is not about nudity and just because he is not doing anything sexual with his penis doesnt mean theres nothing to debate..
.. i beleive the main problem, short and simple, with the frog is this.. Sure there is nothing wrong with nudity.. i think most people here are swinging to the other extreme side of this argument.. someone made a conscious decision to put a penis on the frog.. why.. what did it add? whats the purpose? to say "There is nothing wrong with genitalia" has nothing in common with this particular post.. there is no reason to have genitalia hanging off of an animated character for a regular broadcast commercial.. again, I ask the lot of you, dont you think there is a reason that 99.9% of characters youve seen dont have genitalia.. what would be the point of showing minnie mouse with hard nipples? why would anyone want to see bugs bunny with a penis? what is so appealing about elmer fudd with a big package? i just dont understand.. Most peoples arguments here seem to be radical in the sense of "Oh geez, get a life!! whats wrong with nudity!!" ... this isnt about nudity or nature, as much as you want it to be so that you can be right.. again i say, porn is sex, and sex is natural, so why protect your kids from it? do you get my point? and one poster replied saying "porn isnt natural sex".. Im thinking, uh i dont think people make love on billowy golden clouds... okay , im done

Recursive
02-05-2005, 04:28 PM
wow, i just came back to check the thread and im blown away.This is not about nudity and just because he is not doing anything sexual with his penis doesnt mean theres nothing to debate..
.. i beleive the main problem, short and simple, with the frog is this.. Sure there is nothing wrong with nudity.. i think most people here are swinging to the other extreme side of this argument.. someone made a conscious decision to put a penis on the frog.. why.. what did it add? whats the purpose? to say "There is nothing wrong with genitalia" has nothing in common with this particular post.. there is no reason to have genitalia hanging off of an animated character for a regular broadcast commercial.. again, I ask the lot of you, dont you think there is a reason that 99.9% of characters youve seen dont have genitalia.. what would be the point of showing minnie mouse with hard nipples? why would anyone want to see bugs bunny with a penis? what is so appealing about elmer fudd with a big package? i just dont understand.. Most peoples arguments here seem to be radical in the sense of "Oh geez, get a life!! whats wrong with nudity!!" ... this isnt about nudity or nature, as much as you want it to be so that you can be right.. again i say, porn is sex, and sex is natural, so why protect your kids from it? do you get my point? and one poster replied saying "porn isnt natural sex".. Im thinking, uh i dont think people make love on billowy golden clouds... okay , im done

Bugs Bunny with a penis would be funny. Elmer fudd in a nude scene with a big rifle in a bathtub would be funny. Minnie Mouse with hard nipples.... I'm not sure what hard nipples would look like in a cartoon, are you talking about different nipple sizes? I see bare chested muscle men in cartoons all the time, I dont mind, i wouldnt mind if there were bare chested muscle women(with nipples).

So anyways, I am a bit interested in what the harm is. if a child looks at a picture of Minnie Mouse with nipples visable then what happens? The child starts to cry? grows up to be a rapists? pedofile? What?
I think this is only a matter of the parents being embarest about their children thinking about sex, and they equate nudity with sex, so they get embarest when their children looks at nipples.

Wizdoc
02-05-2005, 04:47 PM
If I hear that ad one more time, I'm going to inflict some serious bodily harm to someone. Gah!

Renzsu
02-05-2005, 04:57 PM
First of all, Jamba is a creation of pure evil, I don't know how to say it in any other way.. annoying adds, waaay too expensive services, cockups leaving teenager kids with big bills, etc. etc.

About the nudity debate, OMG, so much fuss about something so triffle.. as if there's nothing more important to worry about. Ugh, the narrowmindedness is just mentally choking...

Boone
02-05-2005, 04:58 PM
Even though I do wonder why one would waste time adding such a piece to a character( time is money, no? ), I have to say that I find it more shocking when I see two Elephants having a damn good humping session whilst I'm eating my Dinner... :shrug:

mattmos
02-05-2005, 05:05 PM
wow, i just came back to check the thread and im blown away.This is not about nudity and just because he is not doing anything sexual with his penis doesnt mean theres nothing to debate..
.. i beleive the main problem, short and simple, with the frog is this.. Sure there is nothing wrong with nudity.. i think most people here are swinging to the other extreme side of this argument.. someone made a conscious decision to put a penis on the frog.. why.. what did it add? whats the purpose? to say "There is nothing wrong with genitalia" has nothing in common with this particular post.. there is no reason to have genitalia hanging off of an animated character for a regular broadcast commercial.. again, I ask the lot of you, dont you think there is a reason that 99.9% of characters youve seen dont have genitalia.. what would be the point of showing minnie mouse with hard nipples? why would anyone want to see bugs bunny with a penis? what is so appealing about elmer fudd with a big package? i just dont understand.. Most peoples arguments here seem to be radical in the sense of "Oh geez, get a life!! whats wrong with nudity!!" ... this isnt about nudity or nature, as much as you want it to be so that you can be right.. again i say, porn is sex, and sex is natural, so why protect your kids from it? do you get my point? and one poster replied saying "porn isnt natural sex".. Im thinking, uh i dont think people make love on billowy golden clouds... okay , im done

Well it wasn't originally designed as a commercial character was it? Hence the relatively rare appearance of genitalia. But I think I'm with the majority here who think it's really no big deal, you hardly notice it. Chill and save the pitchforks for something worthwhile :)

L.Rawlins
02-05-2005, 06:07 PM
Was it not originally called 'The Annoying Thing'.

Whoever said it was a frog? And if its a 'thing', who ever said that HAD to be a penis? I've already read here that seemingly frogs don't have them.

This is a stupid argument.

If what people here are perceiving as this 'frog' character was doing something in any way sexual than yes, there is reason to question its suitability; otherwise just leave it the hell alone.

...

I just re-read my post and found the name 'The Annoying Thing' highly ammusing in respect of what you are all discussing.

:D

ArtisticVisions
02-05-2005, 06:20 PM
Was it not originally called 'The Annoying Thing'.
That's what the mobile phone "wallpaper" company, Jamster, is calling it (no, I never heard of them either till recently :shrug: ).

Frankly, the fact that the frog has a wee-wee isn't what annoys me (although I do admit it's rather creepy...); what annoys me is that those Jamster morons have to advertise the damn thing every freaking second!
(swear to God, I saw the same Jamster commercial 8 times in a row for an entire commercial period of tv :argh: )

L.Rawlins
02-05-2005, 06:30 PM
I thought it was the phone company that had called it 'Crazy Frog'?

I'm pretty sure it was originally coined 'The Annoying Thing', pre-deal.

...

I could be wrong, though. :shrug:

Beamtracer
02-05-2005, 06:53 PM
The image below is a woman being arrested on Daytona Beach in Florida, USA (March 8, 2004). She was arrested for the crime of sunbathing topless. Police covered her chest, handcuffed her, and took her into custody.
http://mas.scripps.com/NPDN/2004/03/07/TOPLESS_PROTEST_FLDAY105_d.jpg
Click for news story (http://www.naplesnews.com/npdn/cda/article_print/0,1983,NPDN_14910_2711493_ARTICLE-DETAIL-PRINT,00.html)
If an act like sunbathing is a criminal offense in some parts of the world, then it's no wonder they get upset at the sight of the little annoying 3D frog animation.

There are different customs in different parts of the world, and when everyone is thrown together into the big "melting pot" of the internet it's inevitable they don't agree.

The Lonely Planet travel guide for Denmark says that you can tell who the tourists are on the Danish beaches, because the tourists wear tops. The locals go topless.

In countries where woman walk around the village all day with no tops on, breasts are not considered sexual. Interesting that... if people see breasts all day every day they cease to be sexual. The more they are covered the more sexual they become.

Virum
02-05-2005, 07:20 PM
In countries where woman walk around the village all day with no tops on, breasts are not considered sexual. Interesting that... if people see breasts all day every day they cease to be sexual. The more they are covered the more sexual they become.

I kind of like them sexual. :D /obligatory teenage-hormonal-driven statement.

Boobies! :bounce:

*cough*

Carry on folks.

Boone
02-05-2005, 09:11 PM
Re: Beamtracer.

I can't access the larger picture from the link you posted...so I don't know if that woman is...y'know - "fit"? Its such a small picture to judge...:shrug:

marc001
02-05-2005, 11:38 PM
In countries where woman walk around the village all day with no tops on, breasts are not considered sexual. Interesting that... if people see breasts all day every day they cease to be sexual. The more they are covered the more sexual they become.



I don't think I'll ever get tired of seeing beautiful naked women.

Recursive
02-06-2005, 06:23 AM
I don't think I'll ever get tired of seeing beautiful naked women.

These people are not tired of it eather. Put the women in a burka and you would be excited if they showed their head. but does that mean that you are tired of looking at womens heads?

Beamtracer
02-06-2005, 09:51 AM
I don't think I'll ever get tired of seeing beautiful naked women.
You would if you saw naked women all day every day. The reason you get so excited now is because you don't see naked women continuously!

I mentioned in an earlier thread that there are some African tribes where women are bare breasted all the time. The men don't think it's sexy. However, the men get really excited about women's thighs, which must always be covered in their culture.

BigJay
02-06-2005, 02:31 PM
I thought I'd chime in since I really see this as a non-issue.

I'm a parent and see it just as a piece of anatomy. If you don't make a big deal about it neither will the kids. "It's a boy frog now finish your pizza".... really that's all you got to say. why bring sex into it. Kids don't associate nudity with sex unless you put it in their heads.

By 10 I don't see how any kid can have these questions. They try to run around nude at 2, pop into the bathroom all the time on dad and mom as well as when they take a shower, have baths with brother/sister until they are 4-5? by this point a parent had to have said "it's a boy thing"

TheCleaner
02-06-2005, 03:19 PM
I HATE that damn thing.. its the sound.. it goes through me, and i cant understand how they get away with showing it twice or even THREE times in one commercial break on the various cable channels.

Asside from the fact i want it off TV becuase i hear it too damn much, i couldnt care less if it has genitalia

the big counter argument here is.. if REAL LIFE male frogs dont have penis', why does a commercial animated one??

If is seems ok, is it ok to put a female animated character into an advert which will be played , over, and over and over again... with apenis too? sure women dont have them, neither do male frog, but hey, 'who cares'

i think it was a bad descision on the studio's side.. not cus i dont think kids should be exposed to nature.. but that they should have done their research and actually used an animal/whatever that actually has a penis

by the way, the advert sound wasnt originally a motorcycle from, it was a picture of an F1 car, and the sound in the background.. it was supposed to make you laugh, now i turn the tv off at the slightest hint its going to come on

feefunk
02-06-2005, 06:38 PM
the big counter argument here is.. if REAL LIFE male frogs dont have penis', why does a commercial animated one??

If is seems ok, is it ok to put a female animated character into an advert which will be played , over, and over and over again... with apenis too? sure women dont have them, neither do male frog, but hey, 'who cares'



Umm.... IT IS NOT A FROG! it's a cartoon character.

I love this thread.

BigJay
02-06-2005, 07:30 PM
as simple a scene as the frog is in I wondered why they didn't just have him remove the offending part and just rerender it. shouldn't of taken more than a day or two

lightwolf
02-06-2005, 07:48 PM
... I have to say that I find it more shocking when I see two Elephants having a damn good humping session whilst I'm eating my Dinner... :shrug:
I'm not sure (depending on your manners) if they might be more shocked, having to watch you eat dinner while they're... scnr - ;)

And, to be quite honest, even though the ad is a pita and shown on TV _all_ the time (actually, they have a new one here that is the rave now), I get more offended by some politians faces on TV, but I guess that's just me ;)

Cheers,
Mike

TheGreatRaja
02-06-2005, 08:14 PM
I for one hadn't seen the clip. I found it extremely funny :)
(I was offened at last years SuperBowl, I only got to see the one boob!) :D

Remember for every person you'd like to see naked there are at least 100 you don't

lightwolf
02-06-2005, 08:19 PM
(I was offened at last years SuperBowl, I only got to see the one boob!) :D

I didn't even get to see _one_ here in Germany ;) (well, there are plenty others to see I guess ;) ).

How do you pick out Americans in a Sauna? They still wear their swimming trunks!
:eek: *yeuck*

Different cultures I guess. I just hope Erik got a good deal, that would make it easier for us to suffer the visual and aural spam ;)

Cheers,
Mike

ulei
02-06-2005, 10:05 PM
this world we are living in is just so bad and dirty ... we really need jesus to come down again and rescue us from all that evil scum out there! this frog is the devil itself... :hmm:

lightwolf
02-06-2005, 10:10 PM
this world we are living in is just so bad and dirty ... we really need jesus to come down again and rescue us from all that evil scum out there! this frog is the devil itself... :hmm:
LOL, and I thought "Tweety", the followup that plagues us now is the devil :banghead:

Cheers,
Mike

Beamtracer
02-06-2005, 10:22 PM
I have found the solution for all those people who fear that animal nakedness might corrupt the minds of children, especially if the child sees a naked male dog running down the street. All animals should wear pants when in public. Especially dogs.
http://www.fancynancys.com/more%20panties%20and%20collars/DSCN0028.jpg

flipnap
02-06-2005, 10:39 PM
wow... those last three posts only prove that you cannot generate any useful commentary on the subject and i have to wonder why you are wasting time to post. you have nothing intelligent to say one way or the other so you denegrate other posters and mock religion.. very smart.. wow, you guys are on the money.. mockery is the key.. you will go far in life

goodbye

Beamtracer
02-06-2005, 11:38 PM
NEWS UPDATE: BBC news reports that The Annoying Thing (that frog-like creature) 3D animation has resulted in a profit of £10m (US $19 million, €14m) for the company selling the accompanying ring-tone.

So... if you don't like The Annoying Thing, maybe if you were offered £10 million you would change your mind!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4210407.stm

L.Rawlins
02-07-2005, 12:10 AM
You didn't say whether or not it was because they were payed off to end its transmission. :D

Q_B
02-07-2005, 09:22 AM
Ok lets see if i can round it all up here...

First of all, It's not a frog! Neither was intended to be a comercial add in the first place. Run a search here on cgtalk, see if you can find the original animation thread in the wips. With a bit of work, you will find it, it's there, and maibe stop throwing out uninformed posts.

Second, and i'm really sorry to say this, it's a pitty there's still this prejudice thing ... you europeans this ... you americans that ...

Me, as an european, sometimes really feel some urges to slap some dumbness in some US ppl's face, because oh boy its really tempting sometimes. I don't, however, because i'd be putting every american in the same bag, and most of all could be posting just stupid and uninformed things "your kids drink wine, you encourage kids to smoke" HAH damn i can't decide either to laugh or to start a big insultuous post ... anyway ...
As they say, "don't throw peebles at your neighbour's roof if your roof is made of glass" sorry if the translation is missing something.

Last, and people, get your psique checked and relax ... there is nothing SEXUAL with this cartoon ... it's a penis there ... a wee-wee (thanks Slaughters) the character is not doing any sexual act, neither explicit nor implicit. I find it more innapropriate the big fart than the tiny dangling thing there.

Ok there's much more i'd like to add, but nevermind... at least i'm happy cos it seems that people "on the other side of the fence" are really few ... maibe the world is really getting better after all... take care. And just relax.

lightwolf
02-07-2005, 09:28 AM
To be more productive, here is a link to an interview with the artist (before it ever showed up on a mobile).

http://www.newtek-europe.com/uk/community/lightwave/wernquist/1.html

Cheers,
Mike

AJ
02-07-2005, 12:17 PM
Bugs Bunny may not have a penis, but what you don't see is the complex system of dialysis he endures every day. It was his constant medical attention that coined the phrase 'What's up Doc?' - the lesser known answer being 'this colostomy bag'.

At least Crazy Frog can pee.

L.Rawlins
02-07-2005, 12:45 PM
:D

That just made my day.

jcorkery
02-07-2005, 12:55 PM
again, I ask the lot of you, dont you think there is a reason that 99.9% of characters youve seen dont have genitalia..
You seem to be repeatedly offering this line as if it positively proves your point. There are plenty of physical features that most cartoon characters don't possess. Many of the physical features they do possess are very unrealistic. So? Cartoon characters live in an unreal world and apparently live their lives without having to deal with any major real-world problems. They typically don't have body hair or birthmarks, they don't defecate or vomit, they don't get older, they don't suffer major injuries or die no matter how physically battered or beaten they get. It seems that some parents would try in vain to have their children live the life of a cartoon character.

In any aspect of life, if particular details are completely irrelevant to whatever you're presenting, you typically don't include them, but not necessarily because there's something offensive about those details.

In the case of this "Annoying Thing" that we're discussing, it was an existing character that had already received some exposure and publicity in the 3D world before the ad people got their hands on it. To clip the character's genitalia at that point would have been something called "censorship." There's quite a big difference between not bothering to include particular details because of irrelevancy and deleting details that were already there because you fear that certain people may see them as vulgar or offensive even though they're clearly not presented in a vulgar or offensive manner.


again i say, porn is sex, and sex is natural, so why protect your kids from it?
And, again, I fail to see your point. Porn runs the gamut from soft porn to hardcore S&M and other extreme fetish-oriented stuff, and it provides nothing of interest or education for small children. If there were any soft porn videos available that educated the viewer about the biological act of sex, its dangers and potential impact on a relationship, how to prevent pregnancy and disease, and presented a completely respectful attitude toward the opposite sex, then I might consider showing it to my son when he reached an age of sexual interest. But porn doesn't do any of those things, so it's my duty as a parent to educate my child about these things before he's misguided by stuff like porn and peers who brag about their sexual experiences, etc. Exposing my child to porn without any knowledge or education about sex would be kind of like giving him a box of matches and not providing him with any explanation of how they work, what they're used for and how they can be dangerous.

P.S. There's nothing realistic or natural about porn. You're presented with artificially enhanced actors placed in unrealistic situations engaging in wildly exaggerated behavior. Hmm... You know, pornography and cartoons have a lot more in common that I thought!

jcorkery
02-07-2005, 01:12 PM
Bugs Bunny may not have a penis, but what you don't see is the complex system of dialysis he endures every day. It was his constant medical attention that coined the phrase 'What's up Doc?' - the lesser known answer being 'this colostomy bag'.

At least Crazy Frog can pee.

Hilarious!!

JeroenDStout
02-07-2005, 01:28 PM
Bugs Bunny may not have a penis, but what you don't see is the complex system of dialysis he endures every day. It was his constant medical attention that coined the phrase 'What's up Doc?' - the lesser known answer being 'this colostomy bag'.

At least Crazy Frog can pee.
Somehow that made me imagine Grazy Frog peeing around whilst making his "Brrrrrumbbbrrrummmbrrrrummmm-brrrruuummmbrumbrum" noise.

slaughters
02-07-2005, 02:41 PM
...As they say, "don't throw peebles at your neighbour's roof if your roof is made of glass" sorry if the translation is missing something.English version of this saying is, "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones."

Q_B
02-07-2005, 03:09 PM
Heh thanks again for the correct english version.

halo
02-07-2005, 06:53 PM
frogs porn... :twisted:

Beamtracer
02-07-2005, 07:33 PM
http://www.cybersalt.org/cleanlaugh/images/d/dogpants.jpg

L.Rawlins
02-07-2005, 08:25 PM
^ Claiming to be the most intelligent species on the planet doesn't say much for the rest when we actually do stuff like this, does it?

:rolleyes:

maxrelics
02-07-2005, 09:10 PM
I think people are mostly confused as to why the artist decided that a penis would really be necessary on a frog that's used to sell cell phone stuff. Especially when it's not even anatomically correct.

JDex
02-07-2005, 09:22 PM
I think people are mostly confused as to why the artist decided that a penis would really be necessary on a frog that's used to sell cell phone stuff. Especially when it's not even anatomically correct.

He didn't put a penis on it... it is simple some "thing" in the crotch area... and he also didn't create this character to sell cell phone stuff... he created a neat little character that some company liked and paid him for the ability to use it in an ad campaign...

Not really sure what is so hard to understand about that... so much ado about nothing.

jcorkery
02-07-2005, 09:44 PM
I think people are mostly confused as to why the artist decided that a penis would really be necessary on a frog that's used to sell cell phone stuff. Especially when it's not even anatomically correct.

And, for the last time, the guy who created the thing never claimed it was a FROG!!

L.Rawlins
02-07-2005, 10:17 PM
Thats what I've been saying! :D

xynaria
02-07-2005, 10:22 PM
Peepees can seriously give birth to things! shock horror...especially those human things which is bound to make it probably an extremely bad idea (though I have been told frogs are rarely involved)



Congrats Turboforce on a nice bit of animation though not whoever did the ad itself which IMHO is garbage..but hey when did that count :D

jcorkery
02-08-2005, 02:03 AM
Thats what I've been saying! :D

Sheesh... If people are going to insist that thing is a frog, is there anything anatomically correct about any part of its entire body??

elam
02-08-2005, 04:07 AM
If an act like sunbathing is a criminal offense in some parts of the world, then it's no wonder they get upset at the sight of the little annoying 3D frog animation.

Me, as an european, sometimes really feel some urges to slap some dumbness in some US ppl's face, because oh boy its really tempting sometimes

Of course to European ears, the broughaha over an animated penis is absurd when you have to worry about animal sex and pedophelia: Animal sex is not illegal in Sweden, and every year between 200 and 300 pets are injured because of sexual assaults. .. “We have seen an increase since 1999 when child pornography became illegal,” said Johan Beck-Friis. “It appears, in other words, as there are some people who have replaced children with animals. In both circumstances, it is sex with defenceless individuals.” (http://pub.tv2.no/nettavisen/english/article177749.ece)
Got that? Child sex became illegal in 1999. Yes, y'all are so sophisticated. But I digress.

The point for me is , what the point?. Why else draw a penis on a frog considering a frog doesn't have one. To say it doesn't mean anything is contradicted by that fact the they're drawing it in the first place. It must be there for a reason.

It reminds me of a roomate I used to have in college. She used to get naked all the time. At parties, with people she really didn't know that well. Then she used to go on and on about how it wasn't sexual. It was natural to be naked blah blah blah. I was like "yeah right". Found out later she was having group sex and doing all kinds of freaky shit. This ad says more about the advertiser and the people who buy it than a parent that objects too it imo.

Again, what's the point of giving the frog a penis other than some immature gimmick to sell ring tones to stupid teenagers?

JDex
02-08-2005, 04:14 AM
GRRR!!!

As for all the Americans/Europeans stuff... we both have our radicals, rejects, weirdos, prudes, and deviants... Why don't we all just keep the generalizations to our selves.

One vote for closing a thread.

elam
02-08-2005, 04:19 AM
He didn't put a penis on it... it is simple some "thing" in the crotch area.

And you know this how? It doesn't say that it the interview on Newtek's website. And besides, what is a 'thing in the crotch area' but a penis. That's absurd.

Stahlberg
02-08-2005, 04:50 AM
Way to take it to new depths, elam. Googling for mud to sling, then misquoting it. :rolleyes:

And for the last time, that animation was NOT made to sell phones, it was made as a funny portfolio piece by a 3d artist, posted here on CGTalk a LONG time ago, then recently picked up by the company in question. Got it?
An artist should be allowed to create characters however they frikkin want to. Or are you saying he shouldn't have put that thing there because of the possibility it might become the most popular ringtone in the world and shown day and night in a TVC? LOL

Recursive
02-08-2005, 04:54 AM
eden
Of course to European ears, the broughaha over an animated penis is absurd when you have to worry about animal sex and pedophelia: Animal sex is not illegal in Sweden, and every year between 200 and 300 pets are injured because of sexual assaults. .. “We have seen an increase since 1999 when child pornography became illegal,” said Johan Beck-Friis. “It appears, in other words, as there are some people who have replaced children with animals. In both circumstances, it is sex with defenceless individuals.” (http://pub.tv2.no/nettavisen/english/article177749.ece)
Got that? Child sex became illegal in 1999. Yes, y'all are so sophisticated. But I digress.


Before 1999 it was illegal to create or distribute child pornography. So this extended the law to include possesion.

I dont really think you should go into a sillyness of sweden vs us laws since I can dig up a ton of laws that are still in effect in some states in the us, unlike this one which had a hole that has been taken care of.

elam
02-08-2005, 05:18 AM
Way to take it to new depths, elam. Googling for mud to sling, then misquoting it. :rolleyes:

And for the last time, that animation was NOT made to sell phones, it was made as a funny portfolio piece by a 3d artist, posted here on CGTalk a LONG time ago, then recently picked up by the company in question. Got it?
An artist should be allowed to create characters however they frikkin want to. Or are you saying he shouldn't have put that thing there because of the possibility it might become the most popular ringtone in the world and shown day and night in a TVC? LOL

What did I misquote exactly? Child sex/Child pornography? Forgive me. But the person who is quoted by the newspaper is implying as much. "...replacing children with animals." And it's not mud slinging, but fact.

And I don't give a damn what an artist creates. I've stated as much before. But now that I know it was created pre sales gimmick, again what's the point of using it to sell a product if not some cheap ploy to garner sales. "But the penis will *sell* Nigel!" "Brilliant!" It's indicative of the lack of sophistication and blatant juvenility of some folks.


Before 1999 it was illegal to create or distribute child pornography. So this extended the law to include possesion.
And? Legally you could have child porn sitting on your living room table. Spare me the nuance.

*edit*
I just found the original thread. (http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=98422&highlight=the+annoying+thing) The author is Swedish! I understand you now Steven. Wasn't my intent though it is ironic.

jcorkery
02-08-2005, 07:44 AM
But now that I know it was created pre sales gimmick, again what's the point of using it to sell a product if not some cheap ploy to garner sales. "But the penis will *sell* Nigel!" "Brilliant!" It's indicative of the lack of sophistication and blatant juvenility of some folks.

I'm not going to pretend that I know exactly what they were thinking when they picked this character for their advertising, but when did you start looking to the ad industry and the ultra-capitalistic market for maturity and sophistication? You're more upset about a tiny penis on an absolutely unsexy cartoon character than the tons of ads you see on a daily basis that are dripping with blatant sexuality? How about video games and movies that constantly use violence as a "cheap ploy" to garner sales? Or cigarette manufacturers who use cartoon characters in their advertising and put chocolate flavoring in their products?

Please... save your righteous indignation for something that actually deserves it.

Beamtracer
02-08-2005, 08:14 AM
I still say all dogs should be made to wear pants.

JeroenDStout
02-08-2005, 08:14 AM
What did I misquote exactly? Child sex/Child pornography? Forgive me. But the person who is quoted by the newspaper is implying as much. "...replacing children with animals." And it's not mud slinging, but fact.
Um, no, I'm pretty sure this is mud slinging, when people claim you're overcautious find an extreme of the other which is more than slightly provocative and post it in a almost proud manner.
Mud-Slinging.



..
When was the last time a penis got so much attention, anyway?

AJ
02-08-2005, 08:35 AM
And besides, what is a 'thing in the crotch area' but a penis. That's absurd.

If you ever meet a woman, you're in for a shock...

xynaria
02-08-2005, 12:16 PM
If you ever meet a woman, you're in for a shock...


PMSL..you could be on to something there innit :D

halo
02-08-2005, 01:23 PM
LMFAO @ beamtracer... Thats the way...but, is there the possibility of someone being aroused by its bare midrif? :drool: just me then.

jcorkery
02-08-2005, 01:42 PM
Of course to European ears, the broughaha over an animated penis is absurd when you have to worry about animal sex and pedophelia:
Yeah, thank goodness none of that goes on here in the good ol' U.S.A.!

Got that? Child sex became illegal in 1999.
And? Legally you could have child porn sitting on your living room table. Spare me the nuance.
Yeah, that's SOME nuance between what you originally said and what you're saying now.

Ahnold made necrophilia illegal in California last year, no doubt to curb the rampant sex everyone was having with corpses. I can't even bring myself to think about what must be going on in the many states where it's still legal!

elam
02-08-2005, 01:51 PM
I'm not going to pretend that I know exactly what they were thinking when they picked this character for their advertising, but when did you start looking to the ad industry and the ultra-capitalistic market for maturity and sophistication? You're more upset about a tiny penis on an absolutely unsexy cartoon character than the tons of ads you see on a daily basis that are dripping with blatant sexuality? How about video games and movies that constantly use violence as a "cheap ploy" to garner sales? Or cigarette manufacturers who use cartoon characters in their advertising and put chocolate flavoring in their products?

Please... save your righteous indignation for something that actually deserves it.

I'm always looking for maturity and sophistication because I'm an adult. And I feel the same way about all the things you've mentioned. I think anything, be it sex or violence or genetalia that is used for no other reason than to shock or be churlish is worthless. This isn't about righteousness or morality. I don't care about the penis per se but why they chose to keep it to sell to a decidedly teenage and younger market. It's crass and juvenile but then again so is youth.

lightwolf
02-08-2005, 01:55 PM
I think anything, be it sex or violence or genetalia that is used for no other reason than to shock or be churlish is worthless. This isn't about righteousness or morality. I don't care about the penis per se but why they chose to keep it to sell to a decidedly teenage and younger market. It's crass and juvenile but then again so is youth.
Sorry to jump in, but doesn't what you say explain why they kept it in? There is a reason, and it is a solid good reason (_if_ they ever though about it), it sells.
Heck, why do they do test-screenings for movies and re-write, re-shoot, re-edit. To sell. Add more violence and more sex if your target audience demands it (or you think so). I'm not saying this is right, but that is the way it is most of the time.

Cheers,
Mike

jcorkery
02-08-2005, 01:58 PM
I'm always looking for maturity and sophistication because I'm an adult. And I feel the same way about all the things you've mentioned. I think anything, be it sex or violence or genetalia that is used for no other reason than to shock or be churlish is worthless. This isn't about righteousness or morality. I don't care about the penis per se but why they chose to keep it to sell to a decidedly teenage and younger market. It's crass and juvenile but then again so is youth.
Well, then, I think you've picked an incredibly miniscule thing (both figuratively and literally) to single out. There are countless other more serious and impactful things to aim your indignation at.

JeroenDStout
02-08-2005, 02:11 PM
Well, then, I think you've picked an incredibly miniscule thing (both figuratively and literally) to single out. There are countless other more serious and impactful things to aim your indignation at.
(all together) JANET JACKSON!

halo
02-08-2005, 02:14 PM
the morality moron count is pretty high in this thread. get this into your shelllike

it was an animation rendered, that was then found and sold...the company wasn't interested in improving it, changing it whatever, they just wanted it and the sound...ringtone companies are hardly the most pro of advertisers, i shouldn't think they gave a toss about it even if they have noticed it...+ the ad standards agencies have passed it and upheld it.

so the original animation wasn't meant for your perusal, your approval, the originators dont give a flying f~~k about you or you comments because it was never meant for you. The company that bought it dont either...the ad standards agency dont see anything wrong with it either as they see it for what it is as well...ie NOT SEXUAL.

so get over it and stop wasting earths valuable resources FFS

xynaria
02-08-2005, 06:04 PM
LOL Well I think all genitalia anywhere ever should be banned..not just their depiction..the real things..they just aren't worh all the trouble they cause :D

Beamtracer
02-08-2005, 07:34 PM
the ad standards agency dont see anything wrong with it either as they see it for what it is as well...ie NOT SEXUAL.
People, generally, are very afraid of sex, aren't they. Very afraid. Some people are even uncomfortable to talk about it, which makes me wonder how they do it with their partners!

Well I think all genitalia anywhere ever should be banned.
You must agree with my proposition to ban all naked animals, and to force all dogs to wear pants.

xynaria
02-08-2005, 07:49 PM
You must agree with my proposition to ban all naked animals, and to force all dogs to wear pants.


LOL indeed..all nakedness should be banned so people can fetishise everything innit..no way can we allow people to have anything to do with sanity. :D



(mmmn there's a thesis in there ..er ..somewhere....Ed)

halo
02-08-2005, 08:43 PM
theres more pricks around and and a load more bollocks on that internet thing your always on than in that ad on tv

girlfriend's wisdom :hmm:

DangerAhead
02-08-2005, 09:11 PM
This is the best thread ever.

fez
02-08-2005, 09:29 PM
"Well, then, I think you've picked an incredibly miniscule thing (both figuratively and literally) to single out."

What! It's not that small is it? Er, I mean, yeah, that dinky is so small it must have been rendered with subpixel displacement.

Dammit...

xynaria
02-08-2005, 10:19 PM
girlfriend's wisdom :hmm:



peepee seeks middle bottom...apply within....... :eek: :blush:



(I'll get me coat..........)

rendermania
02-08-2005, 11:18 PM
I hope this finally kills this thread...



NEW YORK (AP) -- United Nations diplomats are accustomed to arguing over national borders, chemical weapons, debt relief. This time, the debate is over an even more sensitive question: Does size matter?

There were scattered giggles in the U.N. sculpture garden Wednesday when Secretary-General Kofi Annan dedicated a statue of an elephant some found a bit too anatomically correct.

The 11-foot-tall bronze, a gift to the United Nations from the governments of Kenya, Namibia and Nepal, was made from a cast of an actual African bull elephant. Shortly before the ceremony, workers hauled in potted plants and trees to block a side view of the animal. Before that, early arriving viewers tittered at its 2-foot sexual organ.

``This is exactly the problem between people and wildlife,'' said the Bulgarian-born artist, known as Mihail. ``People cannot face nature. This is how pitiful humanity is.''

Annan said the 7,000-pound sculpture should remind U.N. visitors of humans' responsibility to the environment. In a short dedication speech, he spoke of the statue as a whole but not its sex organ.

``The sheer size of this creature humbles us,'' he said. ``As well it should, for it tells us that some things are bigger than we are.''

Mihail made the cast from a tranquilized wild elephant on a Kenyan ranch in 1980. A trust he founded plans to sell nine copies to raise money for wildlife and the environment.

Mihail was upset by reports that U.N. officials planned to reduce the size of the elephant's penis, although U.N. spokesman Kensaku Hogen said he X uwas unaware of any such plans.

``This is meant to be a symbol of all wildlife, and you cannot castrate wildlife,'' Mihail said.

A passer-by on First Avenue agreed. ``Don't cut it off!'' he shouted at the crowd. ``It's only natural!''

JDex
02-08-2005, 11:25 PM
LOL... that post is kind of like pouring gasoline on a fire while saying, I hope this fire goes out now.

Beamtracer
02-09-2005, 01:01 AM
Secretary-General Kofi Annan dedicated a statue of an elephant some found a bit too anatomically correct.
The elephant is such a beautiful creature, and to understand it fully you must have a look at its genitals.

I bet most of you don't know what an elephant's assets look like. Do you? Well I'll tell you. An elephant may have a "2 foot dongle" when it is in a good mood, but usually you don't see anything. Haven't you ever noticed that you haven't seen any elephant appendages? (note: horses are a different matter altogether)

Recent discoveries show that the elephant's apparent lack of a "packed lunch" is due to the fact that it descended from water creatures. Many other water based mammals also have no visible appendages, such as dolphins and whales.

So, it's important to know what nature has provided, and not cover your eyes from these things.

A word of caution: If you now feel liberated enough to take a look at an elephant's genitals, just don't stand too close!
http://www.onzin.nl/3991/pictures/elephant.jpg

xynaria
02-09-2005, 01:30 AM
. Many other water based mammals also have no visible appendages, such as dolphins and whales.




I have to admit that I have seen a Whales appendage and rather close albeit through glass at Barcelona zoo. Said Whale was in a rather delerious state of excitment or at least that bit was.

Surprisingly enough I survived the viewing both morally and sexually intact though I never did work out what had 'inspired' him given he was solo...must have just have been 'at that age' I suppose and I guess the zoo people hadn't thoughtfully provided a shop window for him to try and 'hide' it in, a luxury I've heard many humans have been extremely grateful for..........................

Beamtracer
02-09-2005, 01:33 AM
I never did work out what had 'inspired' him given he was solo
Maybe it was you!

Q_B
02-09-2005, 09:32 AM
Die, stupid thread! Die!!

This thread has the effect of either making me laugh out loud or make me sick at how low and stupid can some people be...

Won't bother mentioning again all the facts that really matter, cos it seems all the puritans and righteous have a kind of blinds covering their eyes... it's like "look, it is white, see?" "Yes, but since it's black ... blah blah blah ..." yuck! Either people are plain stupid or just don't read other posts prior, wichever the case, remains stupid.

Just a quick mention to AJ_23's reply " If you ever meet a woman, you're in for a shock..." That was priceless, as usual!

And to clarify things (or not) being open-minded and capable of looking at a cartoon with a tiny penis IS NOT A PRIVILEGE OF EUROPEAN PEOPLE, i'm preety sure US folks can do it too (at least the inteligent ones, wich i'm sure is the majority)

You keep talking about juvenile atitudes ... i say GROW UP!
And STOP making Europe/US posts... please?

JDex
02-09-2005, 09:39 AM
The thread almost went 8 whole hours without a response... it won't die if you keep responding. Hey wait! It won't die if I keep responding.

Does anyone else think that the maturity level of the discussion actually went up, since mostly becoming jokes.

DimitrisLiatsos
02-09-2005, 10:04 AM
... AJ_23's reply " If you ever meet a woman, you're in for a shock..." That was priceless, as usual! ...:scream:...hahahahah...Unless it's T'PAU :D :D ....I 've read all 9 pages...hahahah this is a wierd thread ....are we really having a discussion for that amazing animation....

Really ....i found it so funny that the little froggy had ..." a gun ! ":D between his legs ...(it was saying that the animator had a lot of houmor )...."Peos" in Greek or any other word u want...lol...what's all the fuss about ?.....am i missing something here ?

Q_B
02-09-2005, 10:28 AM
Jdex: I just came back to work after Carnaval day-off, and read the new posts, and ... it was stronger than me, sorry!

Fasty
02-09-2005, 10:38 AM
You can't kill it. It's stronger than all of us.

jcorkery
02-09-2005, 10:57 AM
You can't kill it. It's stronger than all of us.

Are you talking about the "frog" penis or this thread?

ShinChanPu
02-09-2005, 11:00 AM
This kind of threads are really interesting...
From time to time I use to find some discussion over here about sex, religions, wars.... and other moral stuff. Internet is a powerful tool for contrasting different cultures (and their own set of moral values). We all can see this. But, instead of doing self-search and analyze every issue "from outside", trying to be OBJECTIVE, getting out prejudices, dogmas and other effective "social basic mind-programming" mechanisms... we choose keep ourselves sheltered from "other possible realities" or points of view. Why this fear? Why can´t we be sceptical about everything we have "learned" in our own society?

I encourage you to imagine you are an etologist/alien and your have to study/analyze/observe your own society to write a scientific thesis about behaviour,beliefs,values,customs... But don´t stop here! Then try to find critic conclussions in order to check what´s wrong, right, advisable, dangerous... if the final aim is a mature-sane-balanced (happy?) world (no place for "beyond-death upcoming paradise" beliefs).
This thread is only a proof of how far from the human being maturity we are.

Excuse my english, and I´ll excuse your spanish ;)

xynaria
02-09-2005, 11:17 AM
Are you talking about the "frog" penis or this thread?



No peepee............no comment:D

jcorkery
02-09-2005, 11:33 AM
No peepee............no comment:D

I vote "chum-chum" as the most amusing term used in this thread.

xynaria
02-09-2005, 12:48 PM
I vote "chum-chum" as the most amusing term used in this thread.


LOL..and perhaps more so in that in the UK at least Chum is a rather well known brand of dog food..............................

elam
02-09-2005, 01:44 PM
Does anyone else think that the maturity level of the discussion actually went up, since mostly becoming jokes.

No it hasn't. Now it's become 'pee-pee' jokes and elephant shit pictures. Just proves that the ad appeals to rather stupid people. :thumbsup:

jcorkery
02-09-2005, 02:02 PM
No it hasn't. Now it's become 'pee-pee' jokes and elephant shit pictures. Just proves that the ad appeals to rather stupid people. :thumbsup:

You know, "maturity" involves developing a sense of humor, learning not to sweat the small stuff, and respecting the opinions and cultures of other people. On the other hand, insisting that you're right and everyone else is wrong and resorting to cheap insults is a sure-fire sign of immaturity.

xynaria
02-09-2005, 02:06 PM
PMSL.....Sing if you're glad to be stupid...La La Laaa La La Laah........

RobertoOrtiz
02-09-2005, 02:12 PM
People, keep this up and I will close the thread.


-R

flipnap
02-09-2005, 02:13 PM
elam, you remember the old cartoon with the cat and dog chasing each other in circles, and the cat steps out but the dog is still caught in circles? just sit back and watch man.. and be glad they enjoy posting, it lets you keep an eye on them.. it would scarier if they were silent. watching the "i know you are but what am i" crew has actually become an enlightening experience..

play on

elam
02-09-2005, 02:31 PM
You know, "maturity" involves developing a sense of humor, learning not to sweat the small stuff, and respecting the opinions and cultures of other people. On the other hand, insisting that you're right and everyone else is wrong and resorting to cheap insults is a sure-fire sign of immaturity.

Well, that's your definition of maturity. It's not mine nor the dictionaries for that matter. I respect a 5 year old that finds a penis funny because, well, they're 5. They should find that funny because they haven't developed a sense of humor that would allow them to appreciate a more subtle form of humor. That's maturity(among other things) . It has nothing to do with 'respecting other cultures and opinions.'

just sit back and watch man
lol flipnap. Your sig cracks me up.

jcorkery
02-09-2005, 03:01 PM
Well, that's your definition of maturity. It's not mine nor the dictionaries for that matter. I respect a 5 year old that finds a penis funny because, well, they're 5. They should find that funny because they haven't developed a sense of humor that would allow them to appreciate a more subtle form of humor. That's maturity(among other things) .

In my opinion, nothing is funny on its own. It's the context that makes something funny. In any given context, I think just about anything can be funny.

If being "mature" means I can't laugh at anything my six-year old son thinks is funny, I'll gladly resign myself to being immature.

It has nothing to do with 'respecting other cultures and opinions.'
That's quite a comment.

elam
02-09-2005, 03:17 PM
In my opinion, nothing is funny on its own. It's the context that makes something funny. In any given context, I think just about anything can be funny.

If being "mature" means I can't laugh at anything my six-year old son thinks is funny, I'll gladly resign myself to being immature.

Okay. So in what context is this add funny? In fact if anything there is no context other than selling cell phones. It's a very short add. It's just a 'frog' and his penis and some sound. It's very basic. Does your son own a cell phone? I don't think so. That's the point. This add isn't geared towards 6 year olds, but teenagers and 20 somethings who should, imo, be moving on.

Your son is six? Well as I said of course it's natural for him to find this funny. 10 years from now will you and your son find this funny? 20? At some point it stops becoming funny and starts becoming weird.

Q_B
02-09-2005, 03:44 PM
Some people, I wonder why, keep looking at the poor creature's penis.

"It's just a 'frog' and his penis and some sound."

If that is how you see this animation, then all is explained.

jcorkery
02-09-2005, 04:11 PM
elam:

I've never seen the advertisement. I've only seen the "Annoying Thing" clip that NewTek Europe has on its site. Personally, I thought it was kind of amusing... the overall look of the character, the weird engine noise it was making... I thought the animation was pretty good. I watched it and it made me smile a little bit. If I were forced to watch it every ten minutes, I might start to get annoyed by it, but not because of the character's penis. As I mentioned previously, it's the context that makes something funny. Pretty much anything would cease to be funny after you see it over and over and over again.

Obviously, my son has never seen the ad, either. But I'm pretty sure that, if he ever did see it, he would find it amusing for pretty much the same reasons I did. Other than maybe noticing, "Oh... I guess this character is a male..." I'm pretty sure that the character's penis would have very little to do, if anything, of the amusement level he derived from it. You know what, maybe I'll show him the clip on NewTek's site later today and see what he thinks about it.

Regardless... Is it desirable that we all consider the exact same things to be either funny or unfunny? I don't think so, and I think to expect such a thing is pretty silly.

You claim that the decision to use a penis-equipped character is just a marketing ploy for teenagers. Maybe I'm giving teenagers too much credit, but I can't imagine that it would have much more of an impact on them emotionally or commercially (sales-wise) than it would on me or my son. Even if it did, I really don't see the big deal. I don't think it's going to contribute to juvenile delinquency, sexual promiscuity, violent behavior, etc. Like I said before, there are countless other ads/products out there that use blatant sex and violence to attract young consumers and may be far more likely to affect a teenager's behavior than this completely unsexy character who happens to have a barely noticeable penis sticking out of his crotch.

xynaria
02-09-2005, 04:36 PM
LOL I have seen the ad countless times as well as the original animation and the perhaps funniest thing is ..er..I never even noticed the said 'appendage'...I even rung up a couple of people who said they hadn't even noticed it either......... ..............





...mind you..I'll be looking out for it now.....................

Phynix
02-09-2005, 05:51 PM
:love:
thats the most bizare Thread i have read on a cg page yet and thats why I think it should go on and on and on....
and I love ALL americans, your attitude let me burst to laughter so many times,
THANK YOU! (that was just for the American Stereotype known everywhere on the world, even in america i think)
dont take me serious ;)
first the good old Janet and now the frog
in Europe and in every other part on the world NOBODY but some extreme freaks (you see what i am pointing at, dont ya? ;) ) would EVER have complained
i think i am a bad person because i have a penis :eek: and there may be serveral persons who saw it :eek:
ever other man is a bad person too of course
lol
sorry for writing so much rubbish but i want to keep that thread allive :thumbsup:

DangerAhead
02-09-2005, 11:34 PM
Does anyone else think that the maturity level of the discussion actually went up, since mostly becoming jokes.

Absolutely!
It's nice to see the comedy kept HIGH and the personal attacks kept to a minimum... or at least forced to be creative... for a change.

Some people seem bound and determined to convince the others that it's "horrible and inappropriate." They can't move on to the next thread until they've won this argument. And they're just forcing the comedy to get better and better...

Best thread ever

Fasty
02-10-2005, 12:48 AM
It's official. The Annoying Thing was listed as "Not Hot" in todays newspaper. It can only go downhill from there.

elam
02-10-2005, 01:05 AM
You claim that the decision to use a penis-equipped character is just a marketing ploy for teenagers. Maybe I'm giving teenagers too much credit, but I can't imagine that it would have much more of an impact on them emotionally or commercially (sales-wise) than it would on me or my son. Even if it did, I really don't see the big deal.

Well, I've had enough experience around advertising executives and managers to know that isn't true. They are, bar none, the most cynical, make-a-buck schleps I've ever been around. Furthermore, they had to know this would cause a minor controversy as a Google news search can attest too. And we all know that controversy breeds interest."My only complaint," says Jamster Marketing Manager Robert Swift, "is he's better endowed than me." (http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story.asp?StoryId=CqFNg0eidyNjPDgfPBI1JCMf6EwzYB2C)
Haha. Wasn't that a clever joke?

But this is Europe and I'm American and as divergent as the cultures are, I could be 100% off on this. But then again, given the humorous sophistication of our European posters, who all seem to be about 12, I think it confirms my thinking.

Btw Corkery, how is it you've been here since 2002 and only posted 10 times prior to this thread. This your Mr.X account? Just curious.

xynaria
02-10-2005, 01:39 AM
There could be a poll I suppose to discover when penises might be deemed 'appropiate'...all as research for international understanding of course..........................

halo
02-10-2005, 08:43 AM
elam, can you read? if so, can you read the posts in this thread? if so, can you read and understand them? if so, can you read and understand that this animation and the sound ALREADY EXISTED AND THE COMPANY WANTED TO SELL THE SOUND AND THEREFORE USED THE ANIMATION THAT SUPPORTED IT AND DIDNT IN ANY ENGINEER OR CHANGE WHAT EXISTED BECAUSE THEY ARE A RINGTONE COMPANY AND RINGTONE COMPANY'S ADS ARE RUBBISH QUALITY WITH THE LEAST TIME MONEY AND EFFORT SPENT ON THEM

THERE IS NO SUPER PENIS CONSPIRACY THEORY, THEY DIDNT SAY "OOOOH THERES A PENIS, IT WILL SELL THIS ODD AND ANNOYING/AMUSING RINGTONE, WHICH OTHERWISE WOULDNT SELL" IN THE SAME WAY THE ORIGINAL ANIMATOR DIDNT PUT IT ON TO MAKE THE ANIMATION ONE OF THE WELL KNOWN EMAIL ANIMATIONS ON THE WEB.

These companies have their secretaries doing voice overs...they're not super marketing geniuses.

please, ffs, please try and get your grey matter sparking on this ! :banghead:

Q_B
02-10-2005, 09:30 AM
@ elam:

"But this is Europe and I'm American and as divergent as the cultures are, I could be 100% off on this. But then again, given the humorous sophistication of our European posters, who all seem to be about 12, I think it confirms my thinking"

Hey man, you know, i'm getting really fed up by your ignorant posts.
Why do you keep bringing US/Europe to the thread?
Why do you keep mentioning European people in a depreciative manner?

Just to your information, i'm European, and since you seem so confident we all seem to be of younger age, i'm 31 not 12.

Again, it seems to be of no consequence trying to reason with you about the actual facts and matters of the original subject, because you always seem to have a way of intrepreting them in your own way (wich is good) but disregarding the facts (wich is bad).

I just ask you politely to stop making prejudiced comments about nationalities. If you'd stop being so narrow-minded on the subject you might find that the "divergent cultures" are not so divergent after all.

@ flipnap:

"elam, you remember the old cartoon with the cat and dog chasing each other in circles, and the cat steps out but the dog is still caught in circles? just sit back and watch man.. and be glad they enjoy posting, it lets you keep an eye on them.. it would scarier if they were silent. watching the "i know you are but what am i" crew has actually become an enlightening experience..

play on"

Well, for someone who seems to disdain at "them", "the ... crew", etc etc, you seem to be the only one actually singling yourself out.

Hope you become even more enlightened...

Lystmaler
02-10-2005, 10:18 AM
But this is Europe and I'm American and as divergent as the cultures are, I could be 100% off on this. But then again, given the humorous sophistication of our European posters, who all seem to be about 12, I think it confirms my thinking. Well this is relevant to a certain degree. While I would personally avoid to bring racist remarks such as this into this thread, you leave me excused.
There is a difference between the european culture, the socalled "12 year old" culture, and the American 'USA' culture, not Latin America or Canada as they are much more similar to the European style. Well, if the president of the US have sex with one indvidual, the nation goes in shock, it's a wide scandale and the media just loves it. If for example an European president or king did the same, the Europeans would get over it rather fast,, as we have seen in history when episodes like that happened. Manny would not care much at all. The main difference in these cultures is that the Americans in question are fixed about sex, and the 'perfect' family life, with words like 'The American Dream' in society this is bound to happen as 'The American Dream' represents the perfect. While in European nations the American Dream is non existent, thus perfecy is much more based uppon the induvidual's oppinioin, and everyone can breath less tense, without the 'I must be perfect, earn monney, gain monney, money is power, and i need a great family' ideology pushed into one and another.
Basically the whole dick thing isnt much of a scandale here in europe, it's just cute, and highly natural, much more natural then Donald Duck. It is to mention that the cave troll in LOTR was made with a dick.

My toughts about the frog is that it is cute.

jcorkery
02-10-2005, 01:40 PM
Btw Corkery, how is it you've been here since 2002 and only posted 10 times prior to this thread. This your Mr.X account? Just curious.
You really are a suspicious character, aren't you? I don't really see what that has to do with this topic and I really don't feel like I owe you an explanation, but, hey, I've got a little bit of time to spare, so I will. Corkery is my real name. Nothing mysterious about it. Normally, I come to CGTalk to search for information whenever I get stumped with one of my 3D apps (Lightwave, 3ds max and XSI). I should probably contribute more to this community, but I'm usually too busy to spend as much time as I'd like here, and I guess I just feel that there are so many other people who are much more knowledgeable about CGI than I am, and they would provide better, more thorough answers to technical questions.

Occasionally, I'll have more spare time to browse the forums here. I happened to stumble upon this thread because of its amusing (IMO) title. What prompted me to involve myself in this thread was a poster who basically insinuated that any parent who disagrees with his opinion about the Annoying Thing's penis was not a good parent. Being a parent myself and not seeing a darn thing wrong with the inclusion of a penis--hardly even noticeable and presented in a completely non-sexual manner--I was kind of annoyed by that. I tried to logically explain my own opinion about it, but that poster has yet to reply. I also took the time to reply to another poster when he basically made an amazing leap from children seeing the Annoying Thing to children watching porn, but he hasn't replied to that, either. Then you made a grand entrance by basically accusing Europeans of being pedophiles!

Have you lived anywhere else besides the U.S.A.? Personally, I've lived in several other countries, visited many more for extended periods, and I can't help but notice that Americans, by far, have a much bigger hangup about nudity than any other country I've been to. Do you think it's ever remotely possible that American attitudes about certain things can be a bit skewed or distorted? Especially when they differ from just about the entire rest of the world? Or do you just automatically think that everyone else is twisted?

In my opinion, it's not exposure to nudity that makes people twisted. What makes people twisted is covering up nudity at all costs and treating it like it's some kind of nasty thing.

baby
02-10-2005, 01:46 PM
Frogs don't have genitals!


what ?
you may want to check this thread then.
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=205751&page=6&pp=15

http://babystudio.free.fr/fellah/froggy.jpg

jcorkery
02-10-2005, 02:51 PM
"My only complaint," says Jamster Marketing Manager Robert Swift, "is he's better endowed than me." (http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story.asp?StoryId=CqFNg0eidyNjPDgfPBI1JCMf6EwzYB2C)



Haha. Wasn't that a clever joke?
I don't know if it was terribly clever, but I can appreciate a person who is able to make jokes about himself.

elam
02-10-2005, 05:22 PM
You really are a suspicious character, aren't you? I don't really see what that has to do with this topic and I really don't feel like I owe you an explanation, but, hey, I've got a little bit of time to spare, so I will. Corkery is my real name. Nothing mysterious about it. Normally, I come to CGTalk to search for information whenever I get stumped with one of my 3D apps (Lightwave, 3ds max and XSI). I should probably contribute more to this community, but I'm usually too busy to spend as much time as I'd like here, and I guess I just feel that there are so many other people who are much more knowledgeable about CGI than I am, and they would provide better, more thorough answers to technical questions.

Occasionally, I'll have more spare time to browse the forums here. I happened to stumble upon this thread because of its amusing (IMO) title. What prompted me to involve myself in this thread was a poster who basically insinuated that any parent who disagrees with his opinion about the Annoying Thing's penis was not a good parent. Being a parent myself and not seeing a darn thing wrong with the inclusion of a penis--hardly even noticeable and presented in a completely non-sexual manner--I was kind of annoyed by that. I tried to logically explain my own opinion about it, but that poster has yet to reply. I also took the time to reply to another poster when he basically made an amazing leap from children seeing the Annoying Thing to children watching porn, but he hasn't replied to that, either. Then you made a grand entrance by basically accusing Europeans of being pedophiles!

Have you lived anywhere else besides the U.S.A.? Personally, I've lived in several other countries, visited many more for extended periods, and I can't help but notice that Americans, by far, have a much bigger hangup about nudity than any other country I've been to. Do you think it's ever remotely possible that American attitudes about certain things can be a bit skewed or distorted? Especially when they differ from just about the entire rest of the world? Or do you just automatically think that everyone else is twisted?

In my opinion, it's not exposure to nudity that makes people twisted. What makes people twisted is covering up nudity at all costs and treating it like it's some kind of nasty thing.

*Way* too much information. As I said, simply curious.

You're veering into pseudo psychology and speculative statements. Yes, I'm sure if we exposed the people of the world to more nudity, we would have less psychopaths amongst us:thumbsup:. Brilliant.

And if you include America, China, India, and the greater Muslim world( roughly 5/9ths of the world's population ), you'll find similar attitudes about nudity. So where you come up with this 'rest of the world' bit, I have no idea. But almost all ideas that revolve around prudence and modesty have their roots in religion which is typically thousands of years old and has put forth much more thought and reasoning than you have.

This has now become boring.

lightwolf
02-10-2005, 05:29 PM
But almost all ideas that revolve around prudence and modesty have their roots in religion which is typically thousands of years old and has put forth much more thought and reasoning than you have.

*Ouch* Time to close the thread ... or is anyone going to mention H***** to really kill it off? ;)

Cheers,
Mike

Tommy Lee
02-10-2005, 05:33 PM
You mean HITLER... Doh!:twisted:

Seriously: Most stupid thread ever, everybody who consider himself an artist wouldn't get offendet by that PENIS!
I never thought that there are so many dumbasses on CG Talk. If somebody is offended by this remark... YOU ARE WELCOME!

All the Best

A freeminded artist
(Tommy Lee)

elam
02-10-2005, 05:33 PM
lightwolf i'd like to buy a vowel.

Q_B
02-10-2005, 05:34 PM
Man... ! You sure fire your guns all around! Prejudice, Nationality ... and now religion!

I was going to comment on that, but then again, better delete it.

lightwolf
02-10-2005, 05:35 PM
You mean HITLER... Doh!:twisted:
He said the H. word ... time to leave the thread... :banghead: ;)

Cheers,
Mike

xynaria
02-10-2005, 05:40 PM
!Warning! !Warning! Society is on the brink of extinction ..exposure to either a bejewelled nipple or a cartoon frog with tiny bits can seriously undermine it's very existence!!


Forewarned is forearmed!



:D

halo
02-10-2005, 05:51 PM
hang on...who was it that thought up the karma sutra and whose temples do sexual acts adorn? ah yes, the famous temples of the europeans.

yeh but no but yeh but.

xynaria
02-10-2005, 05:57 PM
Now that frog and some suitable frogettes in an animated version of the kama sutra....now that really woud be $$$$$$

elam
02-10-2005, 06:01 PM
He said the H. word ... time to leave the thread... :banghead: ;)

Cheers,
Mike

Actually, you said it first. Which is ironic. "Who will be the first person to mention Hitler? Other than myself?" Of course what hitler has to do with this thread, I have no idea.

hang on...who was it that thought up the karma sutra and whose temples do sexual acts adorn? ah yes, the famous temples of the europeans.

yeh but no but yeh but.
Um, I said nudity. Your talking sex. AND didn't you say that genetalia has nothing to do with sex? lmao. Besides, were talking modern day attitudes. Think plz.

And its Kama Sutra , not Karma. Kama is the Hindu God of Love. Karma is something completely different.

Tommy Lee
02-10-2005, 06:02 PM
Ok... Elam you won the 1st price in my dumbass-with-peniscomplex competition.

This one is specially for you:

http://server3.uploadit.org/files/tommylee-AnnoyingThing.jpg

Cheerz

Tommy Lee

PS: Bring on you interpretation of the Annoying Thing and turn this thread in something creative!

DangerAhead
02-10-2005, 06:08 PM
I think it's a little small for the big deal it's made here.

very funny.

lightwolf
02-10-2005, 06:56 PM
Actually, you said it first. Which is ironic. "Who will be the first person to mention Hitler? Other than myself?" Of course what hitler has to do with this thread, I have no idea.
Yes, it is ironic, funny, humour, if you know what I mean (well, not funny if I have to explain it, is it...)
It is an old newsgroup custom to cut off threads when Hitler is mentioned, because it basically means the thread has completly toppled from all pov's.

And, no, I didn't mention it, all I wrote was H*****, but it seems that some people here made the connection.

Sarcasm!!! :scream:

Darn, didn't work.

Cheers,
Mike

jcorkery
02-10-2005, 08:23 PM
*Way* too much information. As I said, simply curious.
Hey, you asked, man. Seemed like you were trying to make some kind of point there.

Yes, I'm sure if we exposed the people of the world to more nudity, we would have less psychopaths amongst us:thumbsup:. Brilliant.
Perhaps you should read my post again, because I didn't say that more nudity would equate to fewer psychopaths. What I did say was that, in my opinion, treating nudity like it's disgraceful, no matter what the context, distorts people's perception of the human body--often dangerously so. It seems you view this as a one-extreme-or-the-other discussion. I don't. What I'm saying is that any extreme is usually not a good thing.

And if you include America, China, India, and the greater Muslim world( roughly 5/9ths of the world's population ), you'll find similar attitudes about nudity. So where you come up with this 'rest of the world' bit, I have no idea.
Well, you could argue, as other people have already touched upon, that India was very accepting of nudity before the West exerted its influence on the country. And I find it a bit odd that you would align American culture with that of the Muslim world and China rather than the rest of the Western world. Do you often do that?

But almost all ideas that revolve around prudence and modesty have their roots in religion which is typically thousands of years old and has put forth much more thought and reasoning than you have.
So, are you speaking about a specific religion? ...Or do you have equal respect for the centuries of wisdom behind every religion that considers nudity to be obscene?

Anyway, I can probably quote an awful lot of thousands-of-years-old bits of religious wisdom that would seem pretty barbaric to most people today.

I'm a little confused, because on one hand you claimed that the penis doesn't bother you, that you simply think it's a juvenile and unsophisticated marketing tactic. But you've also brought up pedophilia, bestiality, and the history of banned nudity within certain religions. So, how do those things relate to the Annoying Thing's chum-chum? You must think they're somehow related, otherwise you wouldn't have injected them into this discussion, right?

And, please, once and for all, explain to me how this ad is damaging in any way to children and deserves to be specifically criticized. I mean, other than your assertion that it's immature, which, as I've mentioned, countless other ads are.

This has now become boring.
NOOOOOOO! You mean, I've failed to entertain you? I am so disappointed in myself...

t-man152
02-10-2005, 08:36 PM
I guess it might ofend people because the small size might be making them self concious about... arhumm... their small size.

I think they should cover it up with a gun and a few dead people in the background. there will be alot less contraversy if they do that.

Tommy Lee
02-10-2005, 08:41 PM
PS: Bring on you interpretation of the Annoying Thing and turn this thread in something creative!

Have to quote myself... so bring it on!!!:twisted:

elam
02-10-2005, 09:32 PM
What I did say was that, in my opinion, treating nudity like it's disgraceful, no matter what the context, distorts people's perception of the human body--often dangerously so.

No you didn't. You said this:What makes people twisted is covering up nudity at all costs and treating it like it's some kind of nasty thing.
I'm simply reading your words.

And, please, once and for all, explain to me how this ad is damaging in any way to children and deserves to be specifically criticized. I mean, other than your assertion that it's immature, which, as I've mentioned, countless other ads are.
I don't. Nor did I ever say that. I criticized it for other reasons.

JeroenDStout
02-10-2005, 09:32 PM
HITLER
Ah! Time for Godwin's Law (http://www.killfile.org/%7Etskirvin/faqs/godwin.html)

Tommy Lee
02-10-2005, 09:51 PM
@elam: Why you edit the "Tommy Lee is an idiot"-part out of your post... Oh and sorry for my quick sketch, I thought I'll turn this thread into something fun...
But I made it worse for you,... hmmmm,... maybe I was right about the penis complex.

So, now you have more stuff to throw at me. But what should I do, I am just 12 years old and have no clue what's going on in this world.:rolleyes:

Please, oh elam, enlighten me with your superior intelligence. Praise elam, bringer of the truth, knower of all!

Amen...

Tommy Lee

PS: Sorry to all who know me, I thought I would never sink to that level. But elam prooved me wrong:twisted:
BTW: I still waiting for your interpretations of the Annoying Thing! Should be fun to watch!

flipnap
02-10-2005, 09:57 PM
http://bcornet.homestead.com/files/Chilbolton/troll.gif

mods since this thread has degenerated into posters insulting other posters, saying cgtalkers are dumbasses, talking about hitler, spending time to paint pictures to use as vehicles to insult other posters, etc..

p.s. Tommy lee.. you remember when you was having those rough times with life, why be so mean towards people.. theres a difference between joking and acidic sarcasm.. you should know how things work by now....

jcorkery
02-10-2005, 10:34 PM
mods since this thread has degenerated into posters insulting other posters, saying cgtalkers are dumbasses, talking about hitler, spending time to paint pictures to use as vehicles to insult other posters, etc.. since rules are being broken all over the place and its still up, cant we close it for being boring.

Personally, I think the most vicious insult dished out in this thread was elam's accusation that Europeans are pedophiles. I guess you don't have a problem with that, flipnap.

Beamtracer
02-10-2005, 10:40 PM
mods since this thread has degenerated into posters insulting other posters, saying cgtalkers are dumbasses, talking about hitler, spending time to paint pictures to use as vehicles to insult other posters, etc.. since rules are being broken all over the place and its still up, cant we close it for being boring..

Please don't close the thread down.

Most people have been discussing this amusing topic in a really polite way. It's only a couple of people who insulted each other.

When this happens, wouldn't it be a fairer thing for those couple of people to get warnings from the mods, and later get banned if they continue to insult others? Otherwise it's not fair to everyone else when a the whole discussion gets closed down.

Yeah, this could be seen as a silly subject, but it's still legitimate. It's discussing a 3D character, and discussing 3D characters is what this forum is all about... silly ones or serious ones.

Actually, the frog-like-creature could also be regarded as seriously as any other 3D character, due to the fact that it's raking in millions of dollars. Most 3D artwork doesn't get that far.

So, should the Annoying Thing be regarded as a serious piece of 3D art? What do you think?

flipnap
02-10-2005, 11:17 PM
Personally, I think the most vicious insult dished out in this thread was elam's accusation that Europeans are pedophiles. I guess you don't have a problem with that, flipnap.



Jcork, who says i dont have a problem with that? i cant post verbatim everything said, i was just trying to make a point.i also recall a few posts about americans but then YOU dont mention that do you.. why are attacking me for what i said anyway? im saying people are getting vicious and the thread should be closed for it. it turned from a spirited debate (regardless of whos right or wrong) to an all out slaughter, which is uncreative, hurtful, and against the rules.. This place used to have a lot of quarrels but they always maintained a certain level of respect.. sorry but im cutting out.. carry on...

elam
02-10-2005, 11:37 PM
@elam: Why you edit the "Tommy Lee is an idiot"-part out of your post... Oh and sorry for my quick sketch, I thought I'll turn this thread into something fun...
But I made it worse for you,... hmmmm,... maybe I was right about the penis complex.

So, now you have more stuff to throw at me. But what should I do, I am just 12 years old and have no clue what's going on in this world.:rolleyes:

Please, oh elam, enlighten me with your superior intelligence. Praise elam, bringer of the truth, knower of all!

Amen...

Tommy Lee

PS: Sorry to all who know me, I thought I would never sink to that level. But elam prooved me wrong:twisted:
BTW: I still waiting for your interpretations of the Annoying Thing! Should be fun to watch!

What are you talking about?

And you shouldn't be so sensitive considering you called me a dumbass( and everyone who disagrees w/you) (http://www.cgtalk.com/showpost.php?p=1958795&postcount=167), Seriously: Most stupid thread ever, everybody who consider himself an artist wouldn't get offendet by that PENIS!
I never thought that there are so many dumbasses on CG Talk. If somebody is offended by this remark... YOU ARE WELCOME!

All the Best

A freeminded artist
(Tommy Lee)
to which I chose to ignore.

A bit thin skinned aren't we? :)

Personally, I think the most vicious insult dished out in this thread was elam's accusation that Europeans are pedophiles.
I didn't say that at all. Here is what I said. (http://www.cgtalk.com/showpost.php?p=1952390&postcount=103)

Beamtracer
02-10-2005, 11:52 PM
Cool it, guys.

Let's talk about 3D, not each other. ;)

asche
02-11-2005, 12:03 AM
Tommy Lee : Thank you for he sketch :)
i read the whole thread now and all time i thought about confronting some narrow minded persons with huuuuuge penises .... just to be mean :)

jcorkery
02-11-2005, 12:06 AM
I didn't say that at all. Here is what I said. (http://www.cgtalk.com/showpost.php?p=1952390&postcount=103)
Oh, sorry... That Europeans are accepting of pedophiles... My mistake.
Either way, pretty vicious and incendiary, don't you think? Seriously.

rendermania
02-11-2005, 12:13 AM
http://babystudio.free.fr/fellah/froggy.jpg


Good god, that's an exceedinly large banana for such a little frog... Tell me again baby, how did it wind up going through your avatar's head? :D Ah nevermind...

And Elam. Cover up that avatar's chest, will ya? He's making me nervous...like a wardrobe failure could occur at any moment.:)

elam
02-11-2005, 12:14 AM
Oh, sorry... That Europeans are accepting of pedophiles... My mistake.
Either way, pretty vicious and incendiary, don't you think? Seriously.

Didn't say that either. Since you can't seem to read literally, here's what I said,"Of course to European ears, the broughaha over an animated penis is absurd when you have to worry about animal sex and pedophelia:"
Clear enough? Worry != acceptance. You might want to actually read the Swedish article while your at it. European words, not mine.

And where is your indignation about the slurs thrown at Americans Cork? Funny you don't mention those.

And Elam. Cover up that avatar's chest, will ya? He's making me nervous...like a wardrobe failure could occur at any moment.:)
K

Stahlberg
02-11-2005, 12:24 AM
It doesn't really help you elam, to quote what you 'really' said.
Of course to European ears, the broughaha over an animated penis is absurd when you have to worry about animal sex and pedophelia:
(Article)
Got that? Child sex became illegal in 1999. Yes, y'all are so sophisticated.

How is that NOT accusing Europeans (Swedes to be specific) of bestiality and pedophilia (and being unsophisticated)?
Hm?
But somehow I get the impression you will never apologize for anything you write, ever.

Slurs about Americans? Were they written by me? No? Then why should I have to listen to you slandering my country?