4 ms·

It's comcerning that you believe you have the authority to tell a parent how to parent their child. The parent can weigh the risks to their child. Let's just

It's comcerning that you believe you have the authority to tell a parent how to parent *their* child. The parent can weigh the risks to their child. Let's just leave it at that.

aaomidi 4y ago
If a parent says I spank my kid, are you still gonna side with the parent? How about if the parent says “in my culture the dad is the first sexual partner of the daughter”? How about then? (And yes. This is a real thing) So no if a parent says oh my kid can’t be lesbian or gay or whatever, they’re just wrong and should be called out. The same way we call out for physical violence, we should call out for mental violence.
- chiefalchemist 4y ago
  You're getting WAY off topic. We have an example we're speaking to. Dry your tears, stick to it, or move on. Either way I'm not interested in your pro-authoritarian beliefs.
- aidenn0 4y ago
  > The same way we call out for physical violence, we should call out for mental violence. The problem with this is there is even less agreement on mental violence then on physical. There are a lot of people who believe a reasonably explicit sex-ed curriculum is mental violence against children.
  - TheHappyOddish 4y ago
    Can we not use "mental violence" as a term? It's inherently wrong, and there are plenty of good terms - abuse, manipulation, etc.
colechristensen 4y ago
I'm going to say confidently that a parent trying to use technology to block their child from knowing what being gay is or talking about it is doing wrong. A child isn't property and has human rights that I demand be respected, one of them is awareness and freedom to discuss such things.
- chiefalchemist 4y ago
  And that child is not a ward of the state. Parenting has scope. Socially and legally. If you don't want anyone over-extending in to your life, beliefs, etc. then that - like it or not - is a two way street. So you'll respect the child while disrespecting the parent? But don't recognize the hypocrisy. You're on the slippery slope. Be careful. Be very very careful. The fall can be painful.
  - progman32 4y ago
    Can you clarify what you believe this slippery slope is causing us to slip towards?
  - colechristensen 4y ago
    I didn’t mention anything about the state. There is no hypocrisy. It has nothing to do with respecting one or the other. There are certain human rights which are wrong to violate no matter who does it or to whom. Basic knowledge of and discussion of human sexuality is one of those rights. The state should be involved in regulating very powerful tools that allow someone to dig in and shape the communication and information available to others. “Big brother” needs to be stopped whether it is a nation or an overbearing parent.
    - chiefalchemist 4y ago
      Links to those rights pleases. Links to the laws (in the USA) that say parents forfeit their rights to those. Either way, that child is not entitled to an unfiltered internet, especially when the parents might suffer legal jeopardy if that became public knowledge. You're taking these children out of context, putting them on an island, and then too strongly suggesting you know better than their parents. Links to that precedent please. Parents have no right. Kids do. And you're the arbitrator? Yes, sorry, there's plenty of hypocrisy in that scenario.
  - mrtesthah 4y ago
    Parents are not owners of their children and as such have no right to deprive them of basic knowledge about their bodies and identities. Sure, there's a slippery slope -- in the direction of authoritarian parental control, which results in parents imprisoning their children within a controlling and insular community to keep them indoctrinated and obedient -- all for the sake of "protecting" them from viewpoints that might one day cause them to think for themselves.

It's comcerning that you believe you have the authority to tell a parent how to parent *their* child. The parent can weigh the risks to their child. Let's just

It's comcerning that you believe you have the authority to tell a parent how to parent *their* child. The parent can weigh the risks to their child. Let's just leave it at that.

aaomidi 4y ago

If a parent says I spank my kid, are you still gonna side with the parent? How about if the parent says “in my culture the dad is the first sexual partner of the daughter”? How about then? (And yes. This is a real thing) So no if a parent says oh my kid can’t be lesbian or gay or whatever, they’re just wrong and should be called out. The same way we call out for physical violence, we should call out for mental violence.

chiefalchemist 4y ago
You're getting WAY off topic. We have an example we're speaking to. Dry your tears, stick to it, or move on. Either way I'm not interested in your pro-authoritarian beliefs.
aidenn0 4y ago
> The same way we call out for physical violence, we should call out for mental violence. The problem with this is there is even less agreement on mental violence then on physical. There are a lot of people who believe a reasonably explicit sex-ed curriculum is mental violence against children.
- TheHappyOddish 4y ago
  Can we not use "mental violence" as a term? It's inherently wrong, and there are plenty of good terms - abuse, manipulation, etc.

colechristensen 4y ago

I'm going to say confidently that a parent trying to use technology to block their child from knowing what being gay is or talking about it is doing wrong. A child isn't property and has human rights that I demand be respected, one of them is awareness and freedom to discuss such things.

chiefalchemist 4y ago
And that child is not a ward of the state. Parenting has scope. Socially and legally. If you don't want anyone over-extending in to your life, beliefs, etc. then that - like it or not - is a two way street. So you'll respect the child while disrespecting the parent? But don't recognize the hypocrisy. You're on the slippery slope. Be careful. Be very very careful. The fall can be painful.
- progman32 4y ago
  Can you clarify what you believe this slippery slope is causing us to slip towards?
- colechristensen 4y ago
  I didn’t mention anything about the state. There is no hypocrisy. It has nothing to do with respecting one or the other. There are certain human rights which are wrong to violate no matter who does it or to whom. Basic knowledge of and discussion of human sexuality is one of those rights. The state should be involved in regulating very powerful tools that allow someone to dig in and shape the communication and information available to others. “Big brother” needs to be stopped whether it is a nation or an overbearing parent.
  - chiefalchemist 4y ago
    Links to those rights pleases. Links to the laws (in the USA) that say parents forfeit their rights to those. Either way, that child is not entitled to an unfiltered internet, especially when the parents might suffer legal jeopardy if that became public knowledge. You're taking these children out of context, putting them on an island, and then too strongly suggesting you know better than their parents. Links to that precedent please. Parents have no right. Kids do. And you're the arbitrator? Yes, sorry, there's plenty of hypocrisy in that scenario.
- mrtesthah 4y ago
  Parents are not owners of their children and as such have no right to deprive them of basic knowledge about their bodies and identities. Sure, there's a slippery slope -- in the direction of authoritarian parental control, which results in parents imprisoning their children within a controlling and insular community to keep them indoctrinated and obedient -- all for the sake of "protecting" them from viewpoints that might one day cause them to think for themselves.