Missbehavn

lol. whoa what did i miss!!!???
Thats a good point as well. The store is clearly not selling sex, otherwise there would be alot more than dancing and posing going on in those windows. It's all just fun and games. I really think it is a fun idea. Most of the girls i met there aren't working in the sex industry and wont wear anything they're arent comofrtable with. I'd say it's the classiest joint in town for sure.
And it is true, in alot of ads the models do wear less...doesnt even matter what they're selling...shoes, cars, make up, seems like everyones scantily clad these days:eek:
 
I live and shop in that area all the time and have never found the women to be inappropriately dressed in the windows. They are usually wearing nice lingerie that is not more revealing than anything you'd see on a billboard driving down the street. Also, the women seem to approach it in a fun way and just smile and wave..... no grinding, flashing or simulated sex acts.

If I was a parent I don't think I'd be upset. Things can be explained to the kid in terms of advertising since the models aren't doing anything sexual. Think we need to be less uptight about racey outfits I've seen teens flashing more cleavage and thongs than the women in the window for crying out loud. LOL.
 
my 2 cents

I've been by there frequently and I see more flesh at the beach in summer. The models are always friendly, having fun and are not inappropriatley dressed. Kids see worse in the fantsy land of TV including huge quantities of "appropriate" violence which is rarely questioned. IMHO people should be less concerned with a mildly risque clothing store and more concerned with the giant one-eyed babysitter in their living rooms.
 
no need to worry about a baby sitter now adays Just make sure theres lots of cams set up then paybacks a Bitch!
As soon as someone mentions is it ok for kids to view on the street (a simple freaken Question which someone else mentioned !!!!) everybody goes nuts with defenses !
 
angelinamassage said:
These were some of the viewpoints I touched upon when I gave my lecture at the Laurnetion University with Nitehawk regarding a similar topic - The social Construction Of Sexuality.

I have always thought of my self as a scholar. LOL I would thoroughly enjoy a private seminar where you (not Nitehawk) can enlighten me on this very subject of the Construcion of Sexuality. Props, exhibits, pictures, video, or some hands on stuff is gladly welcome. LOL ;)

As for your little exchange of words Angelina with the "various" (one to be exact) ladies in this thread. I am just smiling and nodding. Frankcastle pass me the popcorn, this is one you don't want to miss. LOL
 
Sorry Phnine apparantly it wont continue cause im only in grade 8 and i cant read write or see they call me Keller not killer but Keller i tell ya LOL so enjoy the show cause im not old enough for this Rated R :P LOL so ill just wave
 
lickrolaine said:
what boy growing up did not have a copy of the sears mag under their bed?
No way, I was the only one!:eek:

Back to the original topic, can't remember the store on Queen st E (near Parliment?), with the mannequin in lingerie on a highchair. Now that draws way more attention. Especially from streetcar riders. What they sell, is beyond me. And I walked-by many times...

Guess the question didn't get asked before the swords were raised. Or was that bows and arrows?
 
goodtime said:
No way, I was the only one!:eek:

Back to the original topic, can't remember the store on Queen st E (near Parliment?), with the mannequin in lingerie on a highchair. Now that draws way more attention. Especially from streetcar riders. What they sell, is beyond me. And I walked-by many times...

Guess the question didn't get asked before the swords were raised. Or was that bows and arrows?
I know exactly which one they're talking about. It's a decent store i guess. i've been in there a few times, but only a couple items struck my eye...nothing really spectacular about that place.
 
If they aren't sexy or provocative, what's the point for a store like this? :confused:
 
i always wondered why the people fought so hard to allow women to be topless, since no one really does it. I guess it's just comforting knowing we can if we want to??
 
Alexis696969 said:
.......but Canada needs stricter laws for sexual assualt
Ditto for Child Molesters. Penalty: Life sentence - no parole. For serious offenders - lose certain body part.

Here's few expression of human body:
Serveral Vancouver nude bike rallies went off without much incident.

One intrepretation of human body & art:
http://www.spencertunick.com/
Click on Installations to see his work. Here's Montreal 2001, http://www.nerve.com/photography/tunick/nudeadrift/
 
ASYLUM said:
i always wondered why the people fought so hard to allow women to be topless, since no one really does it. I guess it's just comforting knowing we can if we want to??

Hey asylum, so turn it around--why don't YOU go topless in public more often? Your reasons are the same as every other woman who might want to but isn't going to.
 
It does depend on context though. There is a big difference between a nude woman sunbathing on a beach, or walking topless down the street on a really hot day in guelph, and nude woman actively flirting with guys who pass by.

Arguably a woman in lingere in the window of a sex shop is automatically seductive no matter what she does just by being there.

Personally I'm ambivalent about this issue. I don't think kids ought to be watching a lot of porn, but on the other hand, if they happen to see it now and then, I don't think it's the end of the world either. I don't subscribe to the theory that children would be irreperably harmed by it. What will irreperably harm them is their parents not sitting down and trying to explain it to them. They ARE going to encounter highly sexualized content no matter what you do, and so you had best simply help them understand it.
 
fuji said:
Hey asylum, so turn it around--why don't YOU go topless in public more often? Your reasons are the same as every other woman who might want to but isn't going to.

That's a good point. The more often people see women out there topless the less of reaction it will draw each time. Evenutally the site of a woman doing something as normal as washing her car topless won't raise an eyebrow.
 
Alexis696969 said:
Some People cant even handle sexy lingeree in public which i already stated .....so anything more is too much for any public eye so costumes in the window seems like a great idea


The irony is that kids don't seem to have a problem being naked on the beach it's adults that tell them to cover up after a certain age , they are natural with it. It's funny kids who grow up in a nudist colony don't seem hurt by seeing a naked body so even if the models were naked why should you or anyone think it's wrong.
 
I grew up not to far away from a Red Light District.
As a kid you don't really roam the streets on your own until you are 10 or 11. At that time I looked at the posters and occasional woman from the sidewalk and said "wow, that's interesting". Then I quickly forgot about it and searched out the next ice cream store. Even at 17 I had no interest in going to the RLD because you are more caught up with trying to score a date with your classmate.

Also, don't forget that in Europe nudity is much more accepted. Many daily newspapers run pictures of topless or nude girls, sometimes even on the front page.