| Welcome to Australia. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Random thoughts | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 8 2004, 09:17 PM (21,653 Views) | |
| OzzyOsbourne | Jun 1 2005, 05:57 PM Post #856 |
|
I don't think people hang around here much. I suspect that most people are like me, only coming here to check new threads/reply and then just close the window. |
![]() |
|
| Westaway | Jun 1 2005, 08:15 PM Post #857 |
|
They just keep bouncing :)
|
I rely on email notification as to when I log in and check...although I tend to leave the forum open for use when needed. |
![]() |
|
| Bogans and Boozers | Jun 10 2005, 03:11 PM Post #858 |
|
Tasmania for the 18th AFL License!
|
Today's Random Thought: There hasn't been that much activity on these forums for a while, and it's becoming to lose it's buzz and atmosphere, especially considering the fact that this is the thread most posted in, and this post is the first post posted here for 9 days. |
![]() |
|
| Schnapps Drinkers | Jun 10 2005, 07:17 PM Post #859 |
|
Yes, that's me in a toga.
|
My random thought- I've just finished my coursework stuff, and have several days to relax before I have to get cracking on my thesis. I haven't touched in 8 weeks, and I know that soon I'm gonna have a real brain-snap and go berko with the stress. And my cousin's lost my copy of GTA Vice City for PC. Am in a filthy mood because of this. |
![]() |
|
| zebidy | Jun 13 2005, 10:00 PM Post #860 |
|
I think if we added more boobs around the place it would help liven things up. |
![]() |
|
| Westaway | Jun 13 2005, 10:31 PM Post #861 |
|
They just keep bouncing :)
|
definately a boob fetish |
![]() |
|
| Bogans and Boozers | Jun 14 2005, 12:10 AM Post #862 |
|
Tasmania for the 18th AFL License!
|
Maybe if Big Brother had more boobs in it, more people would give a sh*t. |
![]() |
|
| Bogans and Boozers | Jun 14 2005, 12:38 AM Post #863 |
|
Tasmania for the 18th AFL License!
|
While I'm still on the topic of Big Brother . . . Suddenly, it would that certain groups are trying to create a scandal by kicking up a stink about the nudity and the general foulness that occurs in the Big Brother house, especially in the uncut version. Their main argument is that the contestents' behaviour is uncouth and unsuitable for children to watch: they actually did a survey that showed that children as young as 9 and 12 are watching the uncut shows. I wonder how stupid they really are? The Uncut show is broadcast after the time set by the TV lawmakers, who determine what times shows rated above PG can be shown. Secondly, the show is entitled "uncut", which means that its effectively all the uncensored highlights of the week, which rated MA. The rating MA means that no-one under the age of 15 should watch this show. So, what the hell are children doing watching material unsuitable for their age group? Where are the parents? These groups have instantaneously begun pointing the finger directly at Ten for showing this show, and have failed to point the finger at who is really responsible for children what unsuitable shows on TV: their parents! By lying the blame squarely on Ten, these groups blatantly neglect their own duties to their children as parents, by hunting the scapegoat. What's next? Their children start watching porn. Who will they blame? That's right, the sex industry for producing it; not the person who allowed them to access it in the first place (ie: the owner; ie: mum or dad). NB: I don't usually stick-up for the show Big Brother, but I think the nonsense that has been in the media is bullshit NB2: I can see the bullshit tally starting to increase
|
![]() |
|
| Bovs | Jun 14 2005, 11:26 AM Post #864 |
|
Bothenry
|
While you're right and the parents are responsible... I really do think that Big Brother Uncut show takes it too far. Some stuff just shouldn't be on TV, but on that show it is. Maybe it just seems worse because it's "real" but I don't like it! And apart from the issue of standards... who the hell watches such a boring, pointless, annoying, dumb show??? |
![]() |
|
| Bogans and Boozers | Jun 14 2005, 03:49 PM Post #865 |
|
Tasmania for the 18th AFL License!
|
People who watch Big Brother: 1) The daily show: People who don't really have a life, who find it neccessary what other people live their lives as means to have a pseudo-social life. However, the only people being social, are the ones on TV: after all, there is no interaction between the viewer and the viewee. 2) The uncut show: People who are desperate to see skin, nudity, and down right dirty behaviour, who are either too tight (or have too much dignity) to go out and buy smutty material (like porn, or the adult movie channel on pay tv). 3)Big Brother in general: People who secretly enjoy voyeuristic entertainment, who require a legal medium in which they can be entertained. Essentially, it means people who get kicks out of watching people who don't know they're being watched, which is effectively spying (Alvin Purple suddenly springs to mind) |
![]() |
|
| Reubenlucy | Jun 14 2005, 04:00 PM Post #866 |
![]()
Just Hang'n Out in the Members Lounge
:)
|
I watch it solely to see the tits!
I agree with B&B - it is touted as 'un-cut' and at the start explicitly warns that it contains nudity, adult themes, and content that is not suitable for persons under 18 years of age. Whether it is appropriate or not, the show is no different to what you would regularly expect on SBS after 9:30 pm pretty much every night. Yes the show is particularly bad taste, but bad tatse is a matter of opinion - i think that video hits is the worst piece of shit on australian telivision and that pop music is an afront to all decent human beings, but that doesn't mean that it should be banned. It is the role of the censors to protect the public from excessively violent or lurid material - big brother uncut is neither ... you see a few boobs, the occasional old fella and endure a fair bit of gutter talk, but if your over 15 then its likely nothing you haven't seen in an equivilent MA movie, or discussed with your mates over a couple of elicit pints at a party. In my opinion its a case of if you don't like it, don't watch it (i personally tape it, then fast forward through the boring bits to see the action shots, but hey - i'm just an old perv at heart!). Anyway, sorry for intruding and having my two boobs worth (oop's two bob's worth) Reub |
![]() |
|
| Reubenlucy | Jun 14 2005, 04:02 PM Post #867 |
![]()
Just Hang'n Out in the Members Lounge
:)
|
except on BB they know they are being watched, and they are hand picked to be young, single and apt to get their kit off! |
![]() |
|
| Bogans and Boozers | Jun 14 2005, 04:13 PM Post #868 |
|
Tasmania for the 18th AFL License!
|
The first series, the contestents didn't realise the full extent of it all. However, it wasn't until after that first series was shown, that everyone fully knew of ALL the cameras, which meant more and more young, single people who are apt to get their kit off started to apply for the show, so that they could get their 15 minutes of fame (at any risk/ risque behaviour) |
![]() |
|
| Bogans and Boozers | Jun 14 2005, 04:32 PM Post #869 |
|
Tasmania for the 18th AFL License!
|
Now for the sex scandal: The forementioned groups have also complained that because the contestants having sex in the house, they claiming the show is becoming more and more unsavoury. The fact is: on just about every version of BB in the world, there has been sex going on, and there has been hardly any uproar in the media in the countries of origin. The next fact is: when you get a group of young, hot, 20 something's in the one house, the only logical thing to happen next is lust, love, and sexual frustration. The only possible logical step after this is sexual activity. Do these family groups really think that the world's that perfect and pure, and that a group of young, hot 20 somethings can abstain from any form of sexual activity, whilst being surrounded by hot, lustful bodies? I would think not! The whole concept of the show is a social experiment into what happens when a group of men and women placed in situation where they live by themselves, isolated from the rest of society, to see how they socialise. Of course they're going to have sex; Of course they're going to be unruly; and this is because this is how animal instinct works. And that's what you get when you cage humans like animals in a Big Brother zoo, where the audience gets to see the animals perform, but the animals don't see the audience. |
![]() |
|
| OzzyOsbourne | Jun 14 2005, 07:42 PM Post #870 |
|
Australia seems to be turning into a mini-america. Over there some parents are lobbying for it to be compulsory to equip all cars with rear-view cameras because they backed over their child in their Infiniti FX35 (nissan's version of lexus). They are also suing nissan, claiming damages for the emotional and economic loss of their child due to the carmaker's lack of rear-view cameras on the car. A few points on the issue- -The FX35 has a rear-view camera on the options sheet but they were too tight to get it. -If they were worried about rear visibility why did they get a SUV? -Why didnt they check behind the car before backing out? Most normal people do that -They should accept responsibility for their actions, not try to blame the car company for something they had control over. It seems as though everyone wants to blame someone else for the mistakes they make rather than just owning up to their faults. I find it remarkable that the driver of the SUV isnt up for manslaughter, let alone having him sue a company over the issue. Theres no way in hell Nissan is at fault, the very fact that they had the technology as an option but the parents decided to pass on it highlights this point. Having all new cars fitted with the technology would add another 1-2 thousand US dollars onto all new cars bought in the states. Its no replacement for the checks that any responsible driver/parent would take and it would only serve to make people complacent. [/rant] |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The DocMania Memorial Bar · Next Topic » |








10:29 AM Jul 11