Started By
Message

re: Quiet On Set: Nickelodeon Documentary

Posted on 3/21/24 at 9:49 am to
Posted by Bert Macklin FBI
Quantico
Member since May 2013
9048 posts
Posted on 3/21/24 at 9:49 am to
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 by Dire Wolf
bawcomville
Member since Sep 2008
36721 posts
Posted on 3/21/24 at 10:17 am to
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 by VoxDawg
Glory, Glory
Member since Sep 2012
60567 posts
Posted on 3/21/24 at 10:44 am to
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 by SUB
Member since Jan 2001
Member since Jan 2009
20947 posts
Posted on 3/21/24 at 1:45 pm to
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
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram