One more comment....
I received an email this morning from an academic who went into some detail about how Lolita has become a word in the pedophile underground for their "prey". (As some others here have recently noted).
That indeed seems to be the core of the issue. I was (and am) totally unware of that usage. My mental framework for the word is the 1954 Nabokov novel (which I'm old enough to have read when it was new), and that's how I used it. A sexually provocative young girl/woman.
So it seems that this is primerily about language and the way in which words change. We no longer says black or negro, we say African American (though not in Canada). We no longer say Indian, we say Native American (though not in Canada). We no longer say Oriental, we say Asian, though the train is still the Orient Express and we buy oriental carpets.
Words change. If I am guilty of anything, apparently in this case it's not keeping up with underground pedophile jargon.
Yes, it is about language. It's about taking responsibility for the words that you, when you are a writer, put on the page. Every writing teacher I've ever had has stressed the point, --You, as the author, are responsible for every word, down to the last indefinite article, that appears in your work--
I don't think it should be taken lightly, especially on the internet. It is a plain fact that, of all the "industries" in the world, pornography and the sex trade have flourished the most with the streamlining of the internet. It has become the perfect vehicle for the guys and gals who ply sex in every form, including the aberrations. Sub-industries have been created just to battle this crap.
Frankly, I'm surprised that the connotations of this charged word, "Lolita", are not recognized by more of you. It might be wise for some of the demographic on this and other sites to, as Michael stated in his explanation regarding the image and it's title, "Try pulling your heads out of that dark place where they are so obviously stuck".
And Ray, it does not take a pedophile to recognize the connotations of this word, even the light version. As Michael tried to explain, language constantly changes...in the cases that he cited, they moved towards the politically correct end of the spectrum..Obviously, as illuminated here, this is not always the case.
I read quite a bit in many different arenas and I am, as most of you are, painfully aware of the "porno" presence on the web...I have two boys of high school age and I have to be on the watch and up to speed with the technology, most parents deal with this.
I am not a prude though, I know that young boys are very curious about this stuff...However, what is available to kids via the internet is not old school Playboy. It is rock gut, hardcore, and it involves the serious objectifying of young girls...the men in these things..well, scary fuckers is all I can say. I have tuned into our house computer several times and found links sent via chat windows from their friends, that contained some of the most graphic porn I've ever seen. Obviously, most folks, with or without kids, are aware of these issues.
When you decide to publish an article, or caption a photo with sexually charged word like "Lolita", you might want to consider going beyond Wikipedia for your research. Word's like this are the ones that get morphed most easily and things move fast.
Michael, I do appreciate the fact that you have posted a recognition of the fact that this word might have been a bad choice. One question, Why in the hell did it take an "academic" to make your light bulb go off? After reading all the posts questioning this title, didn't you start to think that you might have pressed a questionable button?? Are you a stubborn man?
Your posts and your official rationalization of the issue seem to indicate that you slammed your foot down and rejected all of the opinion on this issue. It makes me question your general objectivity, your ability to ask yourself tough questions regarding the material that you edit and post/publish. I'm feeling that the man at the helm might need to consider some of these points.
I post once in a while here but i read this board voraciously for tech info. and I would like to feel that the proprietor is consistent in his objective status.
As for your sly bashing of the U.S., (and I've noticed this on other sites regarding this topic) fine, you are entitled to your opinion on that and as a progressive American, I agree with some of your sly comments. Our country is a mess right now in many ways. It's ok to make cracks about it, i do it myself. However, our situation is a worry for the whole fucking world at this point. It gets a bit rough when everyone starts jumping on the pile like a bunch of school kids trying to kick the fat kid's ass. No culture/society/government is perfect.
I think you're just jealous that we invented the Twinkie™.