- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Quiet On Set: Nickelodeon Documentary
Posted on 3/21/24 at 9:49 am to ILurkThereforeIAm
Posted on 3/21/24 at 9:49 am to ILurkThereforeIAm
quote:
He wrote and produced scenes, to be acted out by kids, that were sexual in nature. The sexual nature of those scenes went over the heads of young kids, so what audience was he writing to? Who was he trying to entertain with showing a teenaged girl getting sticky stuff squirted on her face? Even though he hasn't been accused (yet) of raping a kid, I think he can stil be called a predator.
He had multiple shows that spanned decades. The fact that they pulled a few scenes where it could be surmised that it was to mimic a sexual situation is speculation. Even the female writer that hated Dan said the scenes were never pitched as a sexual innuendo but just as something funny. Kids like slap stick comedy. Sticky stuff being sprayed in someone's face is funny. You know what else kids think is funny? Feet. My 4 year old daughter loves to joke about her stinky toes. Does that mean that someone in my family has a foot fetish? Should someone have said "hey this looks to explicit and should be cut"? Sure. But to say because they sprayed stuff in a kids faces and made feet jokes to get laughs means he molests children is disingenuous.
If Dan was a child predator, then they would have accused him of actually touching kids. They didn't. Hell Drake Bell said that Dan was the only one on his side once they arrested Peck. I would think a child molester would try to protect the other child molester in fear of a wider investigation.
I hate that yall are making me defend this guy. He was a shitty person. He just wasn't in the same league of shitty people as a guy who fricked Drake Bell in the arse repeatedly. But this doc lumped them all together like it was equal offenses.
This post was edited on 3/21/24 at 10:00 am
Posted on 3/21/24 at 10:17 am to Bert Macklin FBI
quote:
I hate that yall are making me defend this guy. He was a shitty person. He just wasn't in the same league of shitty people as a guy who fricked Drake Bell in the arse repeatedly. But this doc lumped them all together like it was equal offenses.
he employed a guy who proudly displays his John Wayne Gacy penpal collection.
Posted on 3/21/24 at 10:44 am to Bert Macklin FBI
quote:
The fact that they pulled a few scenes where it could be surmised that it was to mimic a sexual situation is speculation.
Okay, groomer.
Posted on 3/21/24 at 1:45 pm to Bert Macklin FBI
quote:
If Dan was a child predator, then they would have accused him of actually touching kids.
Why is physical touch needed to qualify someone as a child predator? Was Jeffrey Epstein not a child predator if he never touched any of the kids that he trafficked to his island?
And I'm not even saying that Schneider was a child predator. I'm just confused by your logic.
This post was edited on 3/21/24 at 1:47 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News