32
   

Would you buy your tween son a "Playboy"?

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 10:06 am
@chai2,
chai2 wrote:
exactly boom.


an ehbeth, I find the pictures erie, of poor quality, and an invasion of the privacy of the minor who could not give consent. We're just of different opinions. The parents don't own the child, and didn't have the right to put them in a position where they were being posed in a way for sex education.

I'm sure there was a least 1 person in Germany who felt (feels) the same way, who is not a prude, or squeamish, or any of that other stuff.

If I saw pictures that that on display in a friends house, I'd feel, well, I can't describe the emotion right now, since no one whose home I've been in displays naked pictures of family members.
I guess I'd think they were, in no particular order....trashy, inappropriate, embarrassing, thoughtless, if they'e been there a while, unmindful.....etc.

I think it's a shame that this has to become the "unenlightened american vs. the sophisticated rest of the world" thing.

I'm not saying any of the above as a representative of america, but as my own opinion. I don't feel unenlightened. I do feel a strong sense of privacy about the body I own, and who gets to see it, and that it's not my place to display someone elses, as that is their body.
Chai, I agree that nude pictures of children, or of ANYONE, shud not be published without his consent.
Children can be very vocal about what thay consent.
Pictures shud not even be taken, without his or her consent, if he or she is able to speak.
Everyone has a moral right to a veto against paparazzi (including parents),
but turning our attention to the issue of damages: I don 't see much harm,
except if the child is recognizable and subject to ridicule by his friends.
Maybe that is what u had in mind ?


I have previously posted the fact that when I was in the hospital
after surgery in 2005, while I was in my room, wearing a hospital gown
that was open in the back, someone took a picture from behind me,
of my rear end (a truly repulsive sight). I was very surprized by the bright flashbulb,
but I don't waste emotion in resentment toward the pervert.
If I met him and recognized him, I 'd not avenge myself upon him.
I have remained fully unharmed.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  3  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 10:14 am
@Thomas,
I have some issues with consent.

It really, really bothers me the way parents post a gazillion photos of their kids on Facebook and the like -- along with tags of the child's real name. Those images will exist for a good, long time. It feels like a real invasion of privacy to me.

The first thing news reporters do anymore is look for an online presence.

I don't think children should have an identifiable online presence.

I have a problem with shows like "Toddlers and Tiaras" and "Dance Moms", etc., and even with children who model for fashion magazines and the like. Sure, there is consent but they still feel like exploitation to me on some level.

I don't have the same feeling about this book -- which comes from a different time and was designed for use by children -- but I can certainly understand why some people would have a problem with it.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 10:57 am
Back to the question, would I buy my tween a Playboy? No. But if he had one, it wouldn't disgust me and I wouldn't remove it. I doubt I'd even ask about it because I'm pretty sure I know why he has it. At that age, it's NOT for the articles, I'm sure.

It's a natural reaction to his age and his development and I see it as no big deal. I don't think I'd talk to him about it, what he's going through, etc., because his father would.

On the other hand, when my daughter got her first boyfriend, at 17, I gave her a bunch of pamphlets on a variety of things about relationships, sex, pregnancy, STDs, etc. We chatted about them, she had some questions, I answered to the best of my ability, and I asked her to tell me if and when she wanted birth control, which she later did. I don't consider it for me to say to someone nearly able to vote, and who's educated about it to 'don't have sex'. Just don't want it happening in my house when I'm home.

When she was 10, we had the menstruation talk although that didn't happen until she was 14. No embarrassment at all about it - natural bodily function, same as sexual interest and urges. We'd talked about boys, relationships, etc., between 10 and 17 when her friends had boyfriends, and when we saw things on tv.

Don't know what else you can do about it. Inform and keep the lines of communication open so you know where you kid is and what he's up to, internally.

My parents, on the other hand, told us nothing about anything, including menstruation, which therefore came as a complete shock. At around 10, we were also shown a film in guidance class about a girl who somehow got pregnant. Didn't make any sense to us because there were no prior discussions about our bodies and boys or her relationships. Plus we were way too young for that talk at the time (maybe today they know more). All we knew is she was pregnant. Rather pointless method of education.

A few years later, my 5 yr old son came home telling us boys had a penis and girls had a 'magina'. Laugh! So, things were starting earlier in his day.
JTT
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 11:24 am
@sozobe,
Quote:
As in, there aren't many men who hold out for the ideal and reject the good-enough who is right there


I think, Soz, that any "men", or "women" for that matter, who forsake love and hold out for the "ideal type" deserve all that they end up getting.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 11:27 am
@Thomas,
Quote:
(seven-footers, three-hundred-pounders, yet ten-percent-body-fatters)


NFL football? You must be joking, Thomas. Even a lot of baseball players are all fat asses.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 11:41 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
If parents don't provide their children with a moral framework, they will not develop one through their genetics.


I sure hope your kids aren't being exposed to your jingoistic tendencies, your propensity to palter, your false sense of the rule of law, ... .
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  -1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 01:10 pm
@DrewDad,
What can you expect from a guy who is known for dumb?

Dumber, I guess.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 01:15 pm
@Thomas,
I don't see any way that that addresses the point that laws which protect children in sexual matters are there to protect them from adult exploitation and not from themselves.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  -1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 01:16 pm
@Thomas,
Quote:
just as a matter of policy, I think it's wrong to deliberately misinform people.


Yet you still keep Garner's book on your shelf, Thomas.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 01:18 pm
@Thomas,
Oh, this is such self-serving tripe. Do you campaign aganist laws which prohibit people under 18 from signing financially binding contracts? Do you campaign to lower the voting age below 18? (If so, what arbitrary age would you choose?) Do you campaign to allow people under the age of 18 to join the military without parental consent? (If so, what abritrary age would you choose?)

Society reoutine sets limits on the behavior of children, and the behavior of adults toward children. Why are you making a special case in sexual matters, with that silly libertarian flag waving?
Setanta
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 01:21 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:
What do you mean, "could not give consent"? There is no age of consent for nude photography. Those children could, and did, consent to the whole thing by volunteering to undress for the camera. Their parents permitted it. What did the parents do to suggest they were treating their children as property?


You know little about children if you think they are capable of resisting parental pressures, or even the pressures of unrlated adults. You think they are capable of consent in the same way as adults are? This is one of the very good reasons for laws which protect children. Really, Thomas, this is a very unfortunate case of you touting your ideology without really giving thought to the implications.
JTT
 
  -1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 01:22 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
Do you see any value in violence being a mystery?

It's but one small step below sex as a human imperative.


What a red herring, Finn. Children are taught from their earliest days about violence.

The only part that is later hidden from them is the horrendous violence perpetrated upon others; others being people who are not Americans.

And that line is being quickly eroded too.

Where oh where are these values and principles that are so often the subject of the relentless bragging?
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 01:33 pm
@boomerang,
I get Chai on this too, re agreement by children to show some art photos in a book or in an art gallery. There has been argument about all this for years (think Sally Mann re the argument getting in the news) and I'm conflicted.

(I still haven't seen the book this thread mentions).
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 01:40 pm
@Mame,
Magina - what an excellent coined word from your son, Mame.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  3  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 02:16 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
You know little about children if you think they are capable of resisting parental pressures, or even the pressures of unrlated adults.

Nobody has yet established that there has been any parental pressure in the case that we talked about. That part is all assumptions and projections so far.

That said, I take Boomerang's point about parents posting pictures on Facebook, exposing kids on TV reality shows, and so forth.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 02:17 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
Oh, this is such self-serving tripe.
Do you campaign aganist laws which prohibit people under 18
from signing financially binding contracts?
Do you campaign to lower the voting age below 18?
(If so, what arbitrary age would you choose?)
Do you campaign to allow people under the age of 18
to join the military without parental consent?
(If so, what abritrary age would you choose?)

Society reoutine sets limits on the behavior of children,
and the behavior of adults toward children. Why are you making a
special case in sexual matters, with that silly libertarian flag waving?
These questions were not directed to me,
but I 'm gonna address them anyway, for the record:
"Campaign" is too strong a word,
but I have advocated to adults and to kids
that every citizen to whom the law applies
has a Natural Right to vote on the people who enact those laws.
While standing in line at the polls to vote maybe 4 years ago,
I commented to a 12 year old boy there waiting with his mother,
that he coud vote too, if it were up to me. I deem it indecent
that kids r screwn out of their Natural Right to vote.
I was very resentful of that, when I was a kid.
I worked in political campaigns, and I was repeatedly ASTONISHED
at the depth of ignorance in adult voters with whom I argued.

I'd not recognize any age-based legal distinctions
in commercial transactions; no discrimination,
except by the will of the parties themselves.

The Individual citizen shud be progressively AGGRANDIZED in his liberty,
by progressively degrading, curtailing, strangling,
truncating, contracting & reducing the power
of the collective and its henchman: government.

I propose that each 4th of July we take a while
for sober contemplation on how this can effectively be accomplished.






David
Setanta
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 02:35 pm
@Thomas,
You're being slippery. My remarks were addressed, and obviously addressed, to the general principle of laws protecting children, and the reasons they exist. I have no interest in the specific case to which you refer. Laws to protect children exist for several reasons, on very good one of which is they cannot reasonably be assumed to be able to give informed consent, and more importantly, to withhold consent.
Setanta
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 02:38 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
You're an prating idiot, but we already knew that. You probably understand children less than Thomas appears to do. You'd love to see a rapacious society in which the weak (physically, intellectually or psychologically) go under to the strong. I'd call you a barbarian, were that not an insult to true barbarians everywhere.
Thomas
 
  4  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 02:51 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
Oh, this is such self-serving tripe. Do you campaign aganist laws which prohibit people under 18 from signing financially binding contracts? Do you campaign to lower the voting age below 18? (If so, what arbitrary age would you choose?) Do you campaign to allow people under the age of 18 to join the military without parental consent? (If so, what abritrary age would you choose?)

Notice one of your last key words here: parental consent. It's one of those limits society sets, I'm all for requiring it, before publishing a child's picture in a book. But the parents here have given their consent, and nobody has yet demonstrated that they acted irresponsibly by giving it.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  5  
Sat 18 Aug, 2012 02:54 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
You're being slippery.

And you're being sanctimonious and patronizing. Since we're both taking so little pleasure from talking to each other, why don't we just take a break? I know I will.
 

Related Topics

My daughter - Discussion by Seed
acting out or real problem - Question by Bl08791
Tween girls - Discussion by sozobe
Nebraska Safe Haven Law - Discussion by Diest TKO
For Parents - Discussion by shawn1989
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 08:14:47