Cosmo Puts Bunny Ears On Minor Dakota Fanning In Article- Creepy!
We’re thrilled to feature Dakota Fanning on the February cover of Cosmopolitan magazine and she looks stunning. Dakota, who turns 18 this month, is a mature, fearless young woman and we are proud to honor her as our Fun Fearless Female of the year,” a Cosmopolitan rep told us. “We applaud her unprecedented accomplishments which will continue in 2012 with her four upcoming movie roles.
7
0
0
0
January 5, 2012
ALL COMMENTS 91
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
VERSE OF THE DAY
“In God, whose word I praise— in God I trust and am not afraid. What can mere mortals do to me?”Psalm 56:4
2. Dakota Fanning has been famous since she was a very young girl, and many young girls know who she is and look up to her. Cosmo knows this, and is putting her on the cover of their racy magazine for this reason. THAT is what Nicole is getting at.
I am done.
it is innappropriate no matter what. and you know it. so go troll on some other website. I will be praying for you.
I wish everyone could see it like we do..
unfortunately the world is dark and it’s only getting darker.
Shows how fast Jesus is coming.
Also, this isn’t really related to the magazine, but has anyone heard of the website gURL.com? It’s a website specifically for teen girls, and I used to go on it a lot to enter the sweepstakes and read the comics, but I couldn’t believe my eyes when I read the articles on the site. Seriously, look at the type of stuff they are writing about TO TEENS! http://www.gurl.com/sex-fun-aids-sucks/
It’s gross what they are encouraging teens to do, I really wish there was a way to get the website to remove articles like that. Any ideas? I might try sending them an e-mail, but I don’t think it will help since the sex section is sadly the most popular part of the site.
All readers- Nicole is not being negative by posting these articles about Cosmo. She is keeping her viewers up to date on just how badly she needs petitioners and signatures. There’s no negativity in that whatsoever. If you think that her posting them is negative, then what a sad view you must have of the rest of the world!
Nicole- What you’re doing is great. I’m sorry you are being bombarded by such negativity toward your mission. Keep up the good work, and don’t let the turkeys get you down!
“Blessed are those who are persectued for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:10)
And, no, it’s not the fact that you disagree that brings us down. It the way you express your opinion, being so negative and trying to defend Cosmo by either puting the blame on someone else (FYI, NO ONE would have to take the blame if this wasn’t available to kids) or saying things like “They don’t target kids,” when they obviously do. You’ve never told us to stop or give up. But you’re certainly not encouraging us to go on, either. You can simply state in a nice way that you don’t agree instead of arguing. This is a good cause, and you’re just putting it down.
And, yes, I do value your opinions highly on the sake of the environment. When I filed a complaint (several complaints) to the FTC, I specifically wrote a recyclable or biodegradable plastic bag because of your views. So yes, I actually do respect your views on that. I wish you’d do the same with ours. Do you see anyone arguing your views on that? Saying things like “who cares about the environment?” No. Why? Because no one wants to bring you down.
“If you don’t like it don’t buy it!” Kind of a selfish statement, isn’t it? So if it’s not your problem, then it’s ok to be other people’s problem? Wow.
Point is, stop trolling. No one here needs that.
As for you saying people say they don’t care about your environmental opinions, how does it make you feel to get people saying they don’t care? Why are our feelings and Nicole’s feelings any different and less important?
And you obviously do have a problem, or else you wouldn’t be arguing.
Also, you keep contradicting yourself. “It’s not for young people to look at.” Then why is it there for kids to see in the first place?
1. It’s on a shelf so people can buy it, not so children can read it.
2. You won’t become immoral from looking at a magazine cover.
3. If a parent actually did their job instead of ignoring their children and leaving them to fend for themselves, this wouldn’t be an issue. I keep sing that this magazine “harms” youg girls. HArms them how? Can a magazine force you to do anything?From what I’ve read, they’re tips, not instructions. You don’t have to follow them if you don’t want to.
I’m making a point and people take it as offense. I’m not going to blame a magazine for my own dumb decisions and getting a cover over it won’t stop people from making stupid choices. You want a cover just so you don’t have to look at it? How selfish is that? Just flip it over! If teens knew any better, they wouldn’t be interested in the magazine if it was stapled to them. No one is in danger from a magazine. Why can’t we just agree to disagree? Why do you have such a problem with a different perspective? There’s more than one way to look at this issue. And from what I see, people are getting hyped up over a lack of responsibility. Everyone’s so concerned children will see it because it’s on news stands. Well, If I wanted to sell something, I wouldn’t hide it.
And why do you ALWAYS blame parents? It’s not always their fault. What if the parent didn’t know their kid bought it or looked at it? What if the parent said they couldn’t, but the kid read it anyway? How is it fair in those cases if the parent gets blamed. Them not knowing is a reflection of bad parenting? That’s SO fair, right?
“(It’s on display. That’s how marketing works).” Funny, I don’t remember it ever being ok to market inappropriate things to just anyone, including underage kids, do you?
These are responses to your points.
1. If it’s there to buy, then why is it on a shelf where kids CAN read it? If it’s only sold to adults, it’s still on a shelf where people can buy it, just not where kids can see it.
2. No, you won’t. But you may feel pressured into becoming immoral. Not EVERYONE may have tons of self control, as you’re making it sound they should. It’d be doing many people a favor.
3. NEWSFLASH, some parents don’t do their job. We can’t change that. So, therefore, it’s an issue. So why don’t we help the issue? Should we just all bum around and wait for change? Most of us don’t do that. Instead of waiting, how bout we actually take ACTION? And it HARMS them by pressuring them. And yes, they are tips. But girls are pressured into doing them because, like I said, they don’t have loads of self control like you obviously expect them to have. No one’s perfect, so you can’t expect everyone’s self control to be. We’re just trying to help.
With what you’re saying, you’re making it sound like all teens should know the right thing to do. Another newsflash: they all don’t. We’re not just trying to cover it so WE don’t have too see it. If we were doing this for ourselves, that’s what we WOULD do! But we want to protect innocent eyes. You always say “If you don’t like it, don’t buy it” Well how selfish is that? I agree to disagree. I’m giving you my opinion as you’re giving yours. But what I don’t uderstand is why you come and read these articles when you don’t disagree? Why do you insist on wasting your time by reading then just go and disagree anyway? Why is someone like you looking at something like this? Are you looking for ways to disagree? If you don’t agree and don’t want to support it. then why ion earth are you reading this article???
If a kid read it in secret, that’s on them. It’s on a shelf so people can buy it, not so they can whip out their evil grins and rub their hands together when a kid glances at the front cover. Why on earth would they want a kid to read it? What would be the point? It’s not there JUST so some kid can read it. If that were true, this would have been an issue years ago. And I’m not saying everyone should have the self control of a 30 year sober alcoholic, but a magazine cover won’t make me rip my shirt of and bed the first guy I see. That’s not what Cosmo is about. Have you even read those sex tips? They take up about ten of 200 pages and it’s not nearly as exciting as the front cover would make them appear.
And it’s an issue that some people make bad parents? You don’t say? That takes me back to my first paragraph on personal responsibility. They’re in charge of their own decisions and bad parenting does not have to mold a persons life. No one is harmed by pressure unless you’re a lump of coal. I’ve been pressured into smoking, but I’m not going to sign a petition on make marijuana illegal. If I don’t want to smoke, I don’t have to. I wasn’t forced into smoking and it’s very easy to avoid the people who might pressure me. Just like it’s easy to flip the magazine over.
You’re making it sound like every kid will disobey their parents just because they can. “Hey look, theres cosmo. I know I’m not supposed to read it, but I’ll do it anyway”. Not every kid is like that. Some of them grew up with morals and know better. And the ones that weren’t as lucky don’t turn out like criminals. Charlize Theron, Drew Barrymore, Janice Dickenson, all those people didn’t let their childhoods turn them into the statistic society thought they’d be.
It’s incredibly selfish to cover something because you don’t want to look at it. Newsflash: Magazines arent in every single line. Go to the candy aisle or self checkout or flip the magazine over. It’s so easy to avoid something you don’t like. And why would she waste her time witing articles on the things she doesn’t like? I’m giving a different point of view besides “COSMO MUST BE STOPPED.” It’s just a magazine. It can’t hurt you if you don’t let it.
And if Cosmo really wasn’t marketing to teens, they shouldn’t have a problem with selling it to adults. But with taking it away from teens, they KNOW they will lose sales. Otherwise, they wouldn’t put up such a fight.
I’m really sorry people tell you to get off the site. That’s not fair to you. I’m like you then. You challenge my opinion, I challenge yours. But also, I really don’t know why you read these articles if you don’t support the mission. Just so you can comment and disagree? But whatever.
And with Dakota on the cover, I think it is still a controversy about that. I mean, she is about to turn 18, BUT she is basically still underage. But if they let her pose for the mag, she DID and SHOULD HAVE had the power to say yes or no for the shoots and article. I don’t see anything wrong with the cover shoot, actually, I think its just a little flirty, thats all. I’m just not too sure about the picture of her in that tightt dress and the bunny ears, and it does show some of her chest. But as I said, SHE made the decision to be in this magazine, she was the one who agreed with it.