But, what I really don't understand is why are we all 'buying' Christian and Freudian nonsense that exposure to sexuality, however indirect, is harmful for children? I mean, female breasts mean food and comfort for them untill we teach them they are object of mysterious, occult and dirty rituals some people do at night, but parents don't, haeven forbid. Perhaps it's time we stop teaching our children that the very fact we have bodies, and that we were born as the result of certain pleasurable activity are sins.

I'm neither partial towards devout Christian nor Freudian philosophies, yet I find the selling of a blatantly sexual image to pre-teens as a bad thing. I wouldn't bring a 12 year old kid into a strip club, for instance. Would you? Sending them to a Britney concert is basically just that. Of course kids are going to learn about sexuality when the time is right, but shouldn't they learn from the parents and not from Britney?

I was repulsed from Madonna 'operation' by her too elaborate and carefully though-of stage act (including choice of deliberately controversial stage name). I am not intersted in discussions of suitability of a crucifix as jewelry on a woman publicly displaying a rather tasteless bra. That said, when I do happen to hear her music, I must admit that some of it has certain merit. I think I will wait for another style change, then buy a decent compilation .

Deliberately controversial stage name? Madonna is her real first name... Not much thought put into that "stage name" if you ask me!

I wouldn't know. Reputation she has on this board is such that I have managed to avoid hearing knowingly anything of her work (which illustrates high esteem I hold this board in ).

Impressive, that's like avoiding raindrops in a thunderstorm. I don't see how one can own a radio and a television and not be assaulted by Britney at least once or twice.