[king_jester]

> The video was extremely flirtatious.

No it wasn't. It is whimsical and youthful, which fits with the theme of making a book for children. Attributing that personality type with flirtation is disturbing and misogynistic.

> It had the same sexualized energy of a Disney movie about Tank Girl starring Bjork with the sound track by Blonde Redhead.

Projecting much?

> It was way to over the top.

I find your sexist crap over the top.

[sitkack]

Hyperbole not projecting.

This video was a toned down version of SBV with a grown woman acting childish and coy, my hyperbolic statement tapped into other performers who utilize the same mechanic. It is not whimsical and youthful, it is offensive. She was selling herself rather than her art. I don't need to look at her knitted socks, watch her fluff her hair or jump on the damn couch. It is manipulative. Recognizing that manipulation is not sexist, on the contrary.

This video would have been way more mature if it showed children engaging with the content, rather than an artful selfie. We need to see how she explains ideas that lead children to a scientific mind.

[king_jester]

> She was selling herself rather than her art. I don't need to look at her knitted socks, watch her fluff her hair or jump on the damn couch. It is manipulative. Recognizing that manipulation is not sexist, on the contrary.

Not only are you blaming the creator for your own sexualized interpretation of the kickstarter vid, but you claim that non-sexual behaviors are evidence of sexualized flirting.

> This video would have been way more mature if it showed children engaging with the content, rather than an artful selfie. We need to see how she explains ideas that lead children to a scientific mind.

Now you are considering her behavior in a video targeted towards parents and children to be inappropriate based on your highly inappropriate sexualization of normal behavior. The video aims to be fun, visual, and cutesy, not a come on for dudes.

[Pxtl]

> whimsical and youthful

Hah, yes. Honestly, if that woman's behavior is "sexual and flirtatious" then my son's kindergarten teacher is hitting on him (she puts on the same act around her students).

Yes, the video was as much about selling Liukas as a character and internet-celebrity as it was about selling her book. That's how marketing works. But anybody who sees it as "sexual" watches too much of the wrong kind of anime.

[pbhjpbhj]

When that same kindergarten teacher behaves towards one of the male parents as to an infant then it's flirtatious. Certainly in Western society much behaviour which is considered fine with a child is inappropriate with an adult, and vice-versa of course.

If I bounce my friend's daughter on my knee and chat to her it's fine - if I bounce my (married) friend on my knee then it would be considered highly inappropriate in the same circumstance and an affront to my partner and hers. Same behaviour, the first is innocent; the second might be but would be assumed to be sexual or appear pseudo-sexual and so [in my country and circumstance] be considered wrong.

[I've not watched the video yet but am addressing the general case.]

[king_jester]

> When that same kindergarten teacher behaves towards one of the male parents as to an infant then it's flirtatious.

The kickstarter video is not directed towards men specifically. A lot of posters seem to see it that the default audience is men and therefore her behavior is somehow flirting. Of course, the audience for kickstarter includes all type of people, including younger children.